Preamble

The House met at Eleven o'Clock

PRAYERS

[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair]

PRIVATE BUSINESS

FORTH ROAD BRIDGE ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL

Read a Second time; to be considered upon Tuesday, 15th April.

LUTON CORPORATION BILL

"to confer further powers upon the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Luton with reference to the repairing of private streets; and for other purposes," presented, read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time.

Oral Answers to Questions — EDUCATION, BRISTOL (HUTS)

Mr. Awbery: asked the Minister of Education if he has reached a decision with respect to the handing over of a portion of Shorehampton West camp to the Bristol education authority, with a view to its use as a temporary school for 600 children who cannot otherwise be accommodated; and if he is aware that the education authority is in a position to take possession of the freed huts and commence converting them for school purposes immediately his decision is given.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education (Mr. Hardman): At present the whole of the Shirehampton West Camp is held for temporary housing, but I am informed that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health is about to declare the, portion in question redundant to his purposes. Other Departments are interested in the future use of the camp, and it will rest with my right hon. Friend

the Minister of Works to re-allocate the portion that is to be declared redundant. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Education has put forward the application of the Bristol Education Authority and has given it his strongest support.

Mr. Awbery: Are we to understand from that answer that a portion will be allocated to industry?

Mr. Hardman: As I have said, the matter is already under discussion. We have asked for an early decision.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE

International Trade Conference

Colonel Ponsonby: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether decisions reached at the International Trade Conference at Geneva will be published for discussion before being implemented.

The President of the Board of Trade (Sir Stafford Cripps): The forthcoming meeting at Geneva of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment will, it is hoped, result in approval on behalf of the member countries of a draft charter for an international trade organisation as well as agreements on specific tariff questions. It is likely that, while the charter cannot be finally approved until the United Nations Conference itself has been held, some of its provisions will be included in an interim agreement covering also the results of the tariff negotiations. The principal object of this interim agreement would be to implement the result of the tariff negotiations. Since this would require Parliamentary sanction, there would naturally be an opportunity for discussion of the whole agreement before its coming into force.

Colonel Ponsonby: Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman realise—I am sure he does—that this is a major operation ant that the eyes of the primary producers of the Empire are upon him? Will he give an assurance that those interests will be properly safeguarded?

Sir S. Cripps: Representatives of the Empire will, of course, be present in Geneva. As the hon. and gallant Gentleman knows, we have already had a long conference here with Dominion and other Empire producers.

Mr. Gammans: Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say how long the conference is likely to last?

Sir S. Cripps: I am not a prophet.

Bazaars (Clothing Coupons)

Mr. Grimston: asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will withdraw the instructions that coupons must be surrendered for articles sold at jumble sales, bazaars, &c., in cases where such articles are gifts from donors who have already surrendered coupons for them or are articles made from unrationed material or by the remaking of second-hand clothes.

Mr. Hurd: asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will encourage the thrifty conversion of outworn clothes during the prolonged scarcity of new clothes by amending the Consumer Rationing Order to exempt from coupons remade garments at sales of work organised for charitable purposes.

Sir S. Cripps: I would refer the hon. Members to the reply given to similar Questions on Tuesday last.

Mr. Hurd: Why should the Government be so slow in removing a control which is merely exasperating hard-working and thrifty ladies and serving no useful purpose?

Sir S. Cripps: There is an extreme shortage of clothing.

Mr. Hurd: Is that not a reason why they should be allowed to convert existing clothing into something useful?

Sir S. Cripps: We should then nave an unequal distribution.

Tourist Information Centre

Mr. Dodds-Parker: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is satisfied that the Travel Association fully appreciate the importance of a knowledge of languages in staffing its new Tourist Information Centre; and how many languages are spoken by the staff at that centre.

Sir S. Cripps: I am informed that the foreign languages spoken by the staff of the centre are French, German, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Dutch, Hungarian and Urdu.

Clothing Coupons (Extended Period)

Mrs. Wills: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the effect of the fuel crisis on production is yet sufficiently established for him to make a definite announcement of the period for which the present issue of clothing coupons will have to last.

Colonel J. R. H. Hutchison: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he intends in the near future to raise the clothing ration allowances.

Mr. Sutcliffe: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the decrease in output of cotton yarn, which during the fuel crisis fell to one-third of current normal production, will affect the present or future issues of clothing coupons and the maintenance of exports.

Sir S. Cripps: Yes, Sir. The loss of production in the cotton and wool industries over the winter period will amount to about two months' output in all, and the present issue of 32 coupons will therefore have to be made to last until the end of October. The loss of production extends also to production for export.

Mr. Sutcliffe: Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman concentrate all his energy upon increasing supplies to the textile industry, with a view to a betterment of the output of household goods?

Sir S. Cripps: I am doing that at the present moment.

Mr. Erroll: Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell us why, in view of the alarming announcement he has just made, he is taking steps to encourage the export of cotton yarn at the present time?

Sir S. Cripps: I am not.

Mr. Erroll: Is it not a fact that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has been offering an increasing inducement to spinners in respect of exports?

Sir S. Cripps: I made an announcement some time ago in the House about the relationship between the export trade and the home trade, and that relationship is being observed.

Sir William Darling: Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that


while coupons may be made to extend for another two months, the clothing which they might be used to replace will not?

Sir S. Cripps: It depends upon the quality of their manufacture.

Export of Houses

Lieut-Colonel Lipton: asked the President of the Board of Trade why more than 1,000 British-made houses have recently been exported to Holland.

Sir S. Cripps: The export of these houses was approved over a year ago in response to an urgent appeal by the Dutch for assistance in repairing devastation from war operations. The houses are not of a type selected for the British housing programme and do not include most of the fitments in short supply in this country. The Dutch are themselves providing the whole of the timber work.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton: Why are licences prohibited in regard to the sale of this type of house?

Sir S. Cripps: It is not one of the types selected for use in this country.

Major Legge-Bourke: Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman give any reason why these houses were turned down? Is it not a fact that the price of them is considerably less than the prices of types adopted?

Sir S. Cripps: That question should be addressed to the Minister of Health and not to me.

Mr. Hoy: Is it not a fact that tenants of these houses have had to pay considerable sums of money in repairs?

Mr. Hurd: Could not some of these houses be made available to farmers and landowners for their farm workers?

Sir S. Cripps: That question should be addressed to the Minister of Health.

Mr. George Wallace: Will my right hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that these houses require a large number of fittings such as are urgently required in this country, and materials as well, and. therefore, they must be exported?

Sir S. Cripps: I pointed out in the original answer that these houses do not include most of the fittings which are in short supply.

Mr. Spence: asked the President of the Board of Trade how many timber houses have been exported from this country since 1st January, 1946; to what countries they have been sent; and what was the average price and the number of standards of timber used in their construction.

Sir S. Cripps: So far as I am aware, none, Sir. The rest of the Question does not, therefore, arise.

Mr. Spence: Will the Minister say whether there was no timber at all in the houses supplied, because the contrary has definitely been stated?

Sir S. Cripps: So I have been informed. The Dutch are supplying all the timber required.

Canadian Leather

Mr. Gammans: asked the President of the Board of Trade, why he has refused licences to import leather from Canada and at the same time sanctioned the purchase of shoes amounting to over 500,000 dollars.

Sir S. Cripps: Imports of leather from Canada are now being licensed at the same rate as in 1946, but the whole leather import programme is at present under review. The imports of shoes which are permitted from Canada are about half the prewar imports by value, and in number represent only a very small proportion of United Kingdom production.

Mr. Gammans: Will the Minister say why he refused to give permission to import leather whilst, at the same time, he allowed the import of finished shoes?

Sir S. Cripps: The leather which comes from Canada is a balancing leather which depends upon the quantity of hides which we have here for tanning, and in that period the balancing leather was not required.

Mr. Walter Fletcher: Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say why he permits the import of 600,000 hides from the Argentine, which is a hard currency country, while, at the same time, refusing imports from Canada?

Sir S. Cripps: They are different qualities of leather.

Weekly Newspapers (Paper)

Mr. Benn Levy: asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will revise


the recent decisions as to the allocation of newsprint so that the increases granted to the daily newspapers shall apply pari passu to the weekly newspapers.

Mr. Vane: asked the President of the Board of Trade on what grounds discrimination is being exercised against local weekly newspapers, whose recent pre-fuel crisis allocation of paper is only being restored in part, whilst that of daily newspapers is being restored in full.

Sir S. Cripps: I would refer the hon. Members to the reply given to the hon. and gallant Member for Penrith and Cockermouth (Lieut.-Colonel Dower) on 1st April.

Mr. Levy: But does my right hon. Friend recall that the main argument which he advanced in favour of this differentiation was that the recent allocation was unfair only if related to wartime consumption, but not if related to prewar consumption? As the wartime cut was on the basis of what the weeklies could afford, surely it is the prewar—

Mr. Speaker: Argument is not a question.

Mr. Spence: Is the Minister aware that the allocations made to these papers may have no relation to the coal supplies delivered and allocated to the mills?

Sir S. Cripps: I have gone into the question of the paper and coal supplies with the English paper mills, and I hope that something is being done to assist them.

Mr. Levy: Does not my right hon. Friend agree that, in view of what I just attempted to point out to him, the fair thing would be to use not the prewar basis of consumption as the ratio for subsequent concessions, but the wartime allocation?

Sir S. Cripps: No, Sir. We believe that the system which has been worked out by the Newspaper Proprietors' Association is the best.

Glycerine

Commander Noble: asked the President of the Board of Trade the present position regarding the supply of glycerine to chemists' shops.

Sir S. Cripps: Retail chemists draw their glycerine from wholesale chemists who are allocated supplies on the basis of the

amount which they received during 1945, plus a current increase of 10 per cent.

Commander Noble: Is the Minister aware that many people are experiencing great difficulty in obtaining glycerine, and will be give the matter his further consideration?

Sir S. Cripps: I am afraid that, in view of the shortage of oils and fats, that is all the glycerine that is available.

Commander Noble: Are we not exporting a great deal?

Sir S. Cripps: I think not.

Cotton Spinning (Experiments)

Mr. Erroll: asked the President of the Board of Trade, now that the experiments at the Wye Mill, Shaw, have been stopped because the Oldham Cardroom Association objected to time and motion study among the cardroom workers, what action he proposes to take to arrange suitable standards of improving labour deployment in the cotton-spinning industry in accordance with the recommendations of the Working Party.

Sir S. Cripps: The experiments at the Wye Mill, Shaw, have been modified, but not, I understand, wholly stopped. In addition, several experiments of a similar nature are now proceeding under the auspices of the Cotton Board in other mills. The outcome of these experiments will be made known to the industry in due course and I hope it will be possible to reach agreement for their more general application in such a manner as will lead to an improvement in production.

Mr. Erroll: Can the Minister say whether the experiments carried out by the mills exactly replace the experiments stopped or modified at the Wye Mill?

Sir S. Cripps: So I understand.

Mr. W. Fletcher: Will the Minister read the two speeches made by the hon. Member for Bolton (Mr. J. Jones) in connection with the restrictive practices, of which this may be an instance?

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY

Low Temperature Carbonisation

Sir Waldron Smithers: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the policy of the Government towards the development of low temperature carbonisation of coal; and if he will make a statement.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power (Mr. Gaitskell): While the present shortage of coal continues it is not possible to allocate additional supplies for low temperature carbonisation. When more coal is available the question of developing this process will be considered in the light of the demand for its products and the importance of their uses.

Sir W. Smithers: Is it not a tact that this industry is really in its infancy, and, in view of the very important by-products being obtained, will not the Minister, in spite of the difficulties, call together in consultation representatives of the industry in order to see how these products can be developed?

Mr. Gaitskell: We are always prepared to consult with the representatives of this or that industry, but I must tell the hon. Gentleman that the quesion of byproducts which would be lost by diverting coal to this particular process has also to be considered.

Sir W. Smithers: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that, after extracting the valuable by-products, what is left is a very good fuel? May I take it from his reply that he will receive a deputation?

Mr. Gaitskell: The chief difficulty is that this fuel does not produce gas in sufficient quantities as a by-product.

Sir W. Smithers: The hon. Gentleman has not answered my question. Will he receive a deputation?

Coal Reserve, Carlisle

Mr. Grierson: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power why his Department has seen fit to deplete the reserve of coal held at Crown Street, Carlisle, and has allocated the same to firms outside the area when the Carlisle textile industry is working short time owing to shortage of fuel.

Mr. Gaitskell: The reserve of coal held at Crown Street, Carlisle, has been sold to industrial consumers nominated by the North-Western Area Emergency Advisory Committee, who are the programming authority for the district.

Mr. Grierson: Can the Minister say why the local firms working on textiles were not given the opportunity of purchasing the coal in view of the acute shortage,

and is he aware that, unless further supplies of coal are available, there is a possibility of certain of these industries closing down?

Mr. Gaitskell: As my hon. Friend is aware the question of allocations to industry is a matter for the President of the Board of Trade. Perhaps he will address his question to my right hon. Friend.

Five-Day Week

Colonel Clarke: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what discrepancies there are between the agreement recntly made between the Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers concerning the five-day week and No. 4 of the heads of agreement signed by representatives of the Mining Association and the Mineworkers' Federation at the Ministry of Fuel on 20th April, 1944.

Mr. Gaitskell: The effect, after the primary vesting date, of collective agreements to which the National Union of Mineworkers and the previous employers were parties, is governed by various agreements reached between the National Coal Board and the Union. These agreements expressly provided for early consideration of the application of the principle of a five-day week and the question of discrepancies does not therefore arise.

Colonel Clarke: Is it not a fact that by the agreement referred to, the mineworkers have pledged themselves, in return for the guarantee of a minimum wage, not to raise the question of remuneration or of conditions during the currency of the agreement, and that there is still a year for that agreement to run?

Mr. Gaitskell: Yes, Sir, but there can be no possible objection to a voluntary agreement replacing this one between the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers.

Colonel Clarke: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the agreement was made by the mineowners on behalf of the companies and the public, and can he say whether they have ever been consulted about the tearing up of this agreement?

Mr. Gaitskell: As they are no longer employers, there would be no reason for consulting them.

Mr. R. S. Hudson: Would the hon. Gentleman define what he means by "voluntary"?

Mr. Gaitskell: I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman is sufficiently master of the English language to realise what the word means.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke: As the Minister of Fuel and Power is not present, may we assume that he is only working a three-day week?

Lieut.-Colonel Kingsmill: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is satisfied that, if the five-day week comes into operation in the coalmining industry in May next, an increased output of coal can be relied upon, and that the target of 200,000,000 tons of open-cast and mined coal can be anticipated.

Sir Peter Macdonald: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if the National Coal Board had formed any estimate of the diminution in the output of mined coal as the result of the coming into operation of the five-day week in May next, and, in particular, if the target envisaged in the recent White Paper can be reached under the new conditions.

Mr. Gaitskell: I will answer these Questions by referring to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Fuel and Power in the House yesterday.

Lieut.-Colonel Kingsmill: Have the National Coal Board approved this or not?

Mr. Gaitskell: They would not have concluded the agreement if they did not approve of it.

Sir W. Smithers: Can the Parliamentary Secretary say what reduction of output is anticipated as a result of this days and hours agreement?

Mr. Gaitskell: That was referred to in detail in yesterday's Debate.

Lieut.-Colonel Kingsmill: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether the agreement just arrived at between the Government and the National Union of Mineworkers had the approval of the National Coal Board, or is the agreement one for which the Government accepts full responsibility.

Mr. Gaitskell: The principle of the working week of five days of 7½ hours for coalminers is one of which His

Majesty's Government fully approve. The detailed conditions applicable to the five-day week have been negotiated by the National Coal Board with the National Union of Mineworkers and are now embodied in the agreement to which the hon. and gallant Member refers. The National Coal Board will operate the agreement with effect from 4th May.

Exports to Holland

Mr. De la Bèere: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether in view of the fact that low-grade coal was exported in considerable quantities to Holland and other places on the Continent during 1946, and that this coal was used by horticulturists for their greenhouses, giving them a substantial advantage over horticulturists in this country who were unable to obtain adequate supplies, he will refuse to make supplies for this purpose available to the European Coal Organisation during 1947.

Mr. Gaitskell: My right hon. Friend has no information as to what proportion of the inferior coal exported by this country to Holland, in 1946, was used by the Dutch horticultural industry. I may inform the hon. Member however, that since 21st December no coal of any kind has been used by that industry, by order of the Dutch coal distributing authority. No United Kingdom coal is at present being allocated to the European Coal Organisation.

Mr. De la Bère: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the feeling among horticulturists in this country was very strong about this coal being sent last year? I welcome the fact that he seemed to give an assurance that no further coal will be sent for this purpose during 1947. Will he confirm it?

Mr. Gaitskell: I have stated that no coal is at present being sent. Obviously, the question of future exports of coal must depend on supplies.

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether, in view of the fact that the definition of domestic coal now includes not only coal suitable for burning in an open grate but also boiler coal for central heating of houses, etc., he will give an assurance that the coal shipped to Holland through the European Coal Organisation in 1946 could not have been classified as boiler coal suitable for domestic central heating.

Mr. Gaitskell: Of the 26,000 tons of United Kingdom inferior coal exported to Holland during 1946, only 2,700 tons, drawn from anthracite dumps, were of a type which it might have been possible to use in central heating boilers. My right hon. Friend has no information as to whether it was in fact so used.

Mr. De la Bère: Can the Minister tell us when coal is not coal, in view of the fact that whenever it is sent out of the country, and we want coal, we are told that it is inferior and utterly unusable.? Surely those people to whom it goes can make use of it? It just does not make sense.

Mr. Gaitskell: The Question was whether this coal was used for heating boilers, which I have answered. Most of the coal exported is very inferior, but there is no shred of evidence to show how it was used.

Sir P. Macdonald: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the coal here is very inferior, and that 25 per cent. of it is unusable?

Mr. Gaitskell: At any rate, it is not as bad as the coal we export.

Mr. De la è: Why not keep the coal at home?

Domestic Allocations

Mr. Driberg: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what meteorological and other reasons determine his allocation of only 34 cwt. of coal a year to each householder in the south of England as compared with 50 cwt. in the north; and if he will modify this disproportionate discrimination in periods of severe weather, such as that of the last few months, in which east and south-east coastal areas in particular have been at least as cold as any part of Britain.

Mr. Gaitskell: The maximum allowances are based on general climatic conditions which necessitate space heating to a greater degree and for a greater part of the year in the north than in the south. When there is a spell of severe weather which does not follow the normal climatic tendencies my right hon. Friend would not be justified on that account in revising the annual allowances. The modification of allowances for short periods would moreover be impracticable.

Mr. Driberg: While not wishing to bring about civil war between the North and the South in regard to this matter, may I ask my hon. Friend why it would be impracticable to make the scheme more flexible to meet the conditions, described in the last lines of my Question, which are undoubtedly a fact?

Mr. Gaitskell: It would be impracticable because the programme for distributing coal has to be fixed well in advance, and it would be quite out of the question suddenly to make alterations without upsetting it.

Mr. R. S. Hudson: In view of the difficulty of acceding to the suggestion of the hon. Member, will the Parliamentary Secretary consider whether it would not be much simpler to increase production?

Mr. Gaitskell: We are all anxious to increase production.

Mr. Gibson: Will my hon. Friend make sure that the 34 cwt. is delivered to the
people by the retailers?

Mr. Gaitskell: The 34 cwt. is a maximum and not a ration.

Mr. Hector Hughes: In regard to the implications of the original Question, has the Parliamentary Secretary taken into account the course of the Gulf Stream?

Mr. Gaitskell: Yes, Sir.

Mrs. Ayrton Gould: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he is aware that considerable hardship is caused by the fact that the allocation of solid fuel to consumers who have young children or invalids in their care at home is no greater than householders, in similar dwellings, where the occupants are out at work all day; and if he will see that, when new arrangements are made for the allocation of domestic fuel, the needs of individual consumers are taken into account.

Mr. Gaitskell: The quantities of fuel allowed under the restrictions are intended to cover the normal needs of ordinary families with children. If there is abnormal need owing to the presence of young children or invalids, it can be dealt with by the local fuel overseer on application.

Mrs. Gould: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that these regulations appear to be completely misunderstood


by the local fuel overseers, who will not give allocations where there is great need because of young children or invalids?

Mr. Gaitskell: If the hon. Lady will let me have a specific instance, I will cause inquiries to be made.

Mr. Marlowe: Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that the instances are manifold all over the country and will he expect housewives to take note of his most unsatisfactory answer?

Opencast Working, Wentworth Woodhouse

Mr. Baldwin: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware that the restoration of the land at Wentworth Woodhouse is not being carried out in a proper manner; and what steps he proposes to take to see that the dwindling amount of land available for agriculture in Great Britain is not further reduced unnecessarily.

Mr. Gaitskell: The answer to the first part of the Question is "No, Sir." In regard to the second part of the Question, no opencast coal working is started on agricultural land without prior consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.

Mr. Baldwin: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that his answer was similar to the one he gave me a long time ago, and shows that he is entirely unaware of the position? Is he aware that I have in my hand particulars of six different sites on the Wentworth Woodhouse estate which have been so-called restored? This is typical of the restoration. The top soil has been completely lost.

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member is giving information, not asking for it.

Mr. Gaitskell: The land at Wentworth Woodhouse is being restored in consultation with the local agricultural executive committee, and we have had no complaint from that committee regarding the restoration.

Major Legge-Bourke: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the latest site, about to be worked, will involve spoiling water resources and trees under 10 years old, and will be a great inconvenience to the local inhabitants?

Mr. Gaitskell: I have discussed this matter personally with the representatives of Earl Fitzwilliam, and we are going into the matter.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: Will everything possible be done to restore the amenities being destroyed as a result of this opencast working?

Mr. Gaitskell: Yes, Sir.

Mr. Baldwin: May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to make a personal investigation of this matter to find out what are the true facts?

Mr. Gaitskell: I have already indicated that I am, in fact, doing that.

Fuel Emergency (Reinstatement)

Mr. Austin: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether, in view of his assurance regarding the victimisation of employees on the resumption of work after the recent industrial crisis, he will consider cancelling contracts placed by his Department with Messrs. L. Gardener, Eccles, until they have reinstated the employees they have not re-employed.

Mr. Gaitskell: So far as my right hon. Friend is able to ascertain, the Ministry of Fuel and Power have no contracts with this firm.

Machinery Production and Export

Mr. Erroll: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power how much coalmining machinery and how many mechanical coal cutters have been produced during the most recent convenient statistical period; and what quantities were for British coalmines, for export to the Empire and to foreign countries, respectively.

Mr. Gaitskell: During the period 1st January, 1946, to 28th February, 1947, 4,066 coal cutters, conveyors and power loaders were provided, of which 1,184 were mechanical coal cutters. Of the 4,066 machines, 3,327 were ordered for British mines, 100 for export to the Empire and 639 for export to foreign countries.

Mr. Erroll: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that my Question asks for figures of production and not the figures for these machines which have been exported? I want to know how many were actually produced.

Mr. Gaitskell: I have already given the figures, and I do not think the hon. Member could have understood them.

Mr. Erroll: In regard to the splitting-up between home and export?

Mr. Gaitskell: Perhaps I may repeat the figures. Of the 4,066 machines produced, 3,327 were ordered and the remainder were exported.

Railway Services and Miners' Allowances

Mr. Vane: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what will be the amount of coal saved by cutting summer railway services by 10 per cent. and by reducing miners' allowance of free coal by 10 per cent. over the same period, and substituting a cash allowance.

Mr. Gaitskell: As regards the first part of the Question I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport to the hon. Member for St. Ives (Mr. Beechman) on 20th March. As regards the second part of the Question, a reduction of 10 per cent. in the coal supplied to miners during the summer would represent 8,100 tons per week, of which 3,400 tons would be from free coal and 4,700 tons from coal at reduced prices.

Mr. Vane: Would the Minister let us know which of these two reductions will be the greater?

Mr. Gaitskell: The total for the summer is 250,000 tons, which is about 10,000 tons a week. Therefore, the saving on transport is rather greater than the saving on miners' coal.

Mr. R. S. Hudson: Does the hon. Gentleman remember last night's Debate, in which we quoted two entirely contradictory figures given by the Government as to the saving? He now says that 250,000 tons will he saved, but one of his colleagues—I think it was the Minister of Transport—said that the figure would be 120,000 tons. Which is right?

Mr. Gaitskell: The Minister of Transport's figure is the one I am giving on this occasion.

Mr. Hudson: But is it the right figure?

Mr. Gaitskell: Yes, Sir.

Polish Coal

Mr. Driberg: asked the Prime Minister if, in considering the import of coal, he will examine the possibility of obtaining some from Poland, whose coal exports in 1946 were nearly twice as much as those of Great Britain; and if, in this and in other connections, he will give an assurance that no ideological differences will be allowed to obstruct the development of trade between Great Britain and Poland.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Attlee): The matter is being discussed with the Polish Trade Delegation now in this country, with special reference to obtaining a share of any increase in the Polish coal export surplus for shipment to bunker depots overseas, which have hitherto been supplied from the United Kingdom.

Bunker Coal

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the prevailing practice of vessels belonging to neutral nations taking supplies of bunker coal from this country instead of from Belgian ports because of the high prices demanded, he will stop this practice, in view of the shortage of our supplies.

Mr. Simmons (Lord of the Treasury): I have been asked to reply. Foreign vessels not carrying cargo to or from this country are strictly limited in the quantity of bunkers they may take here and are not given more than sufficient coal to reach their next port of call. If carrying cargo to or from this country foreign vessels are allowed bunkers in tile United Kingdom on the same basis as British ships. My right hon. Friend is satisfied that this policy reduces the off take of bunkers by foreign ships to the minimum compatible with our position as a maritime nation.

Mr. De la Bère: Is the hon. Member aware that I put this Question down to the Minister of Fuel and Power, who did not like it? He transferred it to the Minister of Transport, who did not like it. Now the hon. Member, with whom I have no quarrel, is put up to deal with it. These important Questions should not be passed over by two important Ministers. It is really treating this House with great indifference in a very important matter. I wish to make a protest.

Mr. Speaker: rose—

Mr. De la Bère: On a point of Order. May I make a protest?

Tile Works (Supplies)

Mr. Baldwin: asked the Minister of Works whether he is aware that, owing to a shortage of fuel, Messrs. Lloyds' Tile Company Limited, Withington, Hereford, will be compelled to close down and put out of employment 86 regular workers; and, in view of the fact that this company has a full order book for the export and home trade, if he will give the matter urgent consideration.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works (Mr. Durbin): I am informed that the gas coke required by this company cannot at present be supplied since the available production is required for more immediately essential services. Every effort will be made to met the needs of the company as soon as supplies improve.

Mr. Baldwin: In view of the fact that this firm is securing export trade, is it not necessary that they should be given first priority?

Mr. Durbin: My information is that the whole of the supplies coming forward from this particular gas company are required for essential local services, such as bakeries and hospitals.

Oral Answers to Questions — PETROL RATIONING (RURAL AREAS)

Sir I. Fraser: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if, in view of the proposed railway cuts this summer, he will increase the petrol ration for public and private motor-vehicle users in rural areas.

Mr. Gaitskell: Where additional public service vehicles are found to be essential, the necessary motor fuel for running them will, of course, be provided. In the case of private motor vehicles, supplementary petrol allowances are granted for essential journeys where the use of public transport is not reasonably practicable.

Sir I. Fraser: Will the Parliamentary Secretary instruct his officers to be more generous to the small man who hires cars and to the private users in remote villages?

Mr. Gaitskell: I am not aware that officers are unjust and unfair in this

matter. If the hon. Member has any specific case in mind, I shall be glad to look into it.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHIEF PLANNING OFFICER

Sir I. Fraser: asked the Prime Minister what staff will be provided for the Chief Planning Officer; and if he proposes to appoint an agricultural consultant.

The Prime Minister: The Chief Planning Officer will have only a small personal staff of four or five qualified persons. The planning staff will include, as already explained, the planning officers of the Departments principally concerned with economic affairs, of which the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is one.

Sir I. Fraser: In view of the appointment of an eminent industrialist as industrial adviser, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that our greatest industry, agriculture, should be similarly represented, so that there may be co-ordination?

The Prime Minister: No, Sir. I think the hon. Member will realise that the industrial adviser is an adviser over the general field of industry and economics, including agriculture. Other special advisers will be there, including those from the Ministry of Agriculture for agricultural matters.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what are the qualifications of the persons who are to assist the Chief Planner?

The Prime Minister: If the hon. Gentleman wishes to know the qualifications of any person I shall be glad to give him the information, but I have not got it with me now.

Oral Answers to Questions — ELECTRICITY SUPPLIES

Poles

Sir W. Smithers: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will do all in his power to provide the poles and other equipment so that the Buckrose Light and Power Company, Limited, can supply electrical energy to Sancton Vicarage, near York.

Mr. Gaitskell: The supply of suitable poles is insufficient to meet all priority needs. My right hon. Friend would.


therefore, not feel justified in asking the Electricity Commissioners to issue a licence for the acquisition of the poles required for this connection.

Sir W. Smithers: Would the hon. Gentleman do his best, and may I inform him that, in view of his very unsatisfactory answer to Question No. 28, I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment?

Lifts

Commander Noble: asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the present position with regard to the use of lifts in blocks of flats, etc., especially where old or infirm people may live, or families with young children.

Mr. Gaitskell: The use of electricity in residential premises is at present prohibited for all purposes during certain hours, except where a certificate is given by a registered medical practitioner that it is necessary in the interests of health. As my right hon. Friend announced in the House yesterday, the Government have under urgent consideration a comprehensive plan, as an alternative to a compulsory rationing scheme, to secure reductions in domestic gas and electricity consumption during the summer, and will announce it as soon as possible after the Easter Recess. In the meantime, the existing Order remains in force.

Commander Noble: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is extremely difficult for people to do shopping and house work and be able to use the lifts in the period allowed, and will he give further consideration to this matter?

Mr. Gaitskell: We are aware of this, and that a number of other factors in the present situation are not satisfactory, and we will take them into account.

Oral Answers to Questions — EMPLOYMENT

Textile Industry

Mr. Hollis: asked the Minister of Labour what increase of labour there has been in the textile industry in the first three months of this year.

The Minister of Labour (Mr. Isaacs): Figures are not available for any date later than the end of January, 1947. It is estimated that during that month there was a net increase of 13,000 in the labour force of the textile industries.

Mr. Hollis: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what proportion of that 13,000 have been unemployed, or on short time?

Mr. Isaacs: Not without notice.

Coal Mining (Foreign Workers)

Mr. Hollis: asked the Minister of Labour, how many Poles are now working in the mines.

Mr. Isaacs: 184 Poles have gone into the coalmining industry. Thirty are in actual employment. One hundred and fifity-four are in their preliminary four weeks' training.

Mr. Hollis: asked the Minister of Labour what plans he has for the engagement of foreign, other than Polish, labour in the mines.

Mr. Isaacs: At the present time, as many entrants as the industry can absorb are forthcoming from British applicants and volunteers from the Polish Re-settlement Corps. There is thus no immediate question of the engagement of foreign workers, but with a view to the utilisation of this source if and when circumstances render it desirable, discussions are in progress with the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers.

Mr. Gammans: Does that mean that the coal industry has all the men it requires?

Mr. Isaacs: No, Sir, the answer means what it says:
at the present time, as many entrants as the industry can absorb. …

Public Service

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: asked the Minister of Labour what proportion of the decrease of 80,000 in the number of persons employed in public service prescribed for 1947 by paragraph 128 of Cmd. 7046 had been achieved by the latest convenient date.

Mr. Isaacs: Comprehensive figures of the numbers employed in public service are only available at quarterly intervals, and information as to the change that has occurred since the end of December, 1946, is not yet available.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: In view of the fact that the last two quarterly returns have shown an increase, can the Minister


give us an assurance that the decrease budgeted for in the White Paper is even being attempted?

Mr. Isaacs: It would be impossible to give that assurance until I have seen the figures.

Building and Civil Engineering

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: asked the Minister of Labour what proportion of the increase of 50,000 in the labour force in building and civil engineering prescribed for 1947 in paragraph 128 of Cmd. 7046 had been achieved by the latest convenient date.

Mr. Isaacs: An increase of approximately 10,000 occurred in the labour force of the building and civil engineering industry during January. Figures for later months are not yet available.

Dispute, Eccles

Mr. Proctor: asked the Minister of Labour how long it will take to obtain a final decision from the conciliation machinery in the case of the dispute at Messrs. Gardeners, Eccles.

Mr. Isaacs: As I stated in the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend, and to my hon. Friend the Member for Stretford (Mr. Austin) on 26th March, I trust that the industry's constitutional machinery will be enabled to operate with the least possible delay. I am, however, not in a position to say how soon a final settlement will be reached.

Mr. Proctor: Is my right hon. Friend aware of the extent of this dispute and the fact that 12 men have been dismissed and have been victimised? Is he aware that an influential deputation representing the workers attended on Members of this House, and expressed the opinion that the use of the official machinery might involve a delay of two years in coming to a final decision?

Mr. Isaacs: I am not aware of those facts, and I do not accept that there is likely to be that delay. I am a little disappointed that the trade unionists do not go to their trade union for cooperation. It is the action of the men in the shops which is delaying the operation of the machinery, not the trade unions.

Mr. Proctor: Would my right hon. Friend inquire into the facts, and see

whether it is not necessary, in view of the possibility of a grave dispute, for this machinery to be overhauled?

Mr. Isaacs: That is another question. The trade union concerned is making its application for the machinery to be put into operation, and while the men concerned are taking certain action they are preventing the machinery from coming into operation.

Mr. Austin: Is not my right hon. Friend aware that a rank injustice is being done to these 12 men, and that this is the most flagrant case of victimisation that has yet appeared since the resumption of the industry? As this has been going on since 3rd March, will he not do something to settle it?

Mr. Isaacs: Not any more than I have previously said I would do. I am not satisfied that there is a rank injustice. It is not for me to express an opinion, but the fact that there has been so much interference has only delayed a settlement.

Fuel Emergency (Reinstatement)

Mr. Proctor: asked the Minister of Labour how many men have been refused re-employment after the general resumption of work at the end of the fuel crisis in the Manchester area.

Mr. Isaacs: I regret I have no information on which I could base a reply to this question.

Government Returns (Labour)

Mr. Joynson-Hicks: asked the Minister of Labour what is the estimated proportion of the total working population of the country employed otherwise than in Government or local government offices in the execution, compilation and fulfilment of returns and records to meet Government requirements, including Pay As You Earn.

Mr. Isaacs: I have no information on which to base an estimate.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks: Does the right hon. Gentleman ask the House to believe that his production estimates have been arrived at without taking into account the nonproductive element in the manpower force in industry?

Mr. Isaacs: I am not asked for an opinion on the matter, but the fact is that to get this information I should have to


communicate with every firm in the country, to ask them what part of their staffs were engaged on this work.

Agricultural Workers (Age)

Mr. Joynson-Hicks: asked the Minister of Labour what is the present average age of the labour force engaged in the agricultural industry; and what is the annual wastage therefrom.

Mr. Isaacs: The average age of the men aged 14–64 insured under the Unemployment Insurance Acts in farming, forestry, and market gardening at July, 1946, is estimated to have been approximately 37 years. The corresponding figure for women aged 14–59 years was 28 years. Statistics of annual wastage are not available.

Mr. Hurd: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how the average age of farm-workers will be affected if 100,000 young farmworkers arc called up under the new National Service Act?

Mr. Isaacs: I would not like to say, without checking the figures, but if the hon. Gentleman will give me notice I will give him the information.

Foreign Workers (Agriculture)

Mr. Joynson-Hicks: asked the Minister of Labour how many Poles, displaced persons, German prisoners of war, German ex-prisoners of war, Italian prisoners of war and Italian ex-prisoners of war, respectively, are now employed in agriculture; and how many he estimates will be so employed by 1st September, 1947.

Mr. Isaacs: No displaced persons, German ex-prisoners of war or Italian prisoners of war are employed in agriculture. The number of Poles so far placed in farming and forestry is approximately 2,600; about 1,400 Italian ex-prisoners of war are employed in the industry, and the present allocation of German prisoners of war is approximately 163,500 I cannot at this stage estimate the numbers in these various classes that will be employed in agriculture by 1st September, 1947.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks: Does the right hon. Gentleman feel that, on the figures which he has given to us, and his ignorance of the future, it will be possible to implement the assurance of his Parliamentary Secretary that there will be no drop in the

labour force in agriculture by the time of the next harvest?

Mr. Isaacs: I can implement that. We are quite satisfied that we can supply agriculture with the labour it needs. I must be ignorant of the proportion of the different classes of labour, until I know how many of the main class will be required.

Major Tufton Beamish: Has the Agricultural Workers Union agreed to the employment of displaced persons on the land?

Mr. Isaacs: I am only dealing with the Question on the Order Paper.

Mr. Driberg: Can my right hon. Friend say why it is difficult to estimate the number of German prisoners who will be employed on 1st September, since we know that they are being repatriated at a steady rate of 15,000 a month?

Mr. Isaacs: I am asked to give estimates of the proportions of several classes. Until I get the information as to which men are German prisoners, I cannot give the other figures, but I can say that we are in a position to supply agriculture with the labour required.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: Will my right hon. Friend take into account the question of making arrangements for those prisoners who have gone back to Germany and who wish to return, so that they can take up jobs in agriculture?

Mr. Isaacs: If they have been here and gone home again, and there are other people on the Continent willing to come, we shall give them preference.

Oral Answers to Questions — TREASURY DEPOSIT RECEIPTS

Mr. Norman Smith: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the total increase of cost to the Treasury, to the end of 1946, by reason of the banks having transferred from Treasury deposit receipts to Government loans carrying higher rates of interest than that accruing on Treasury deposit receipts.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Glenvil Hall): It is not possible to give an estimate since many hypothetical factors are involved.

Mr. Norman Smith: Will the right hon. Gentleman say why it is—seeing that in


these transactions the banks do not part with anything, but instead, as the Macmillan Committee on Finance and Industry pointed out, create what they claim to lend—the Treasury allows the banks to put a fast one over the taxpayers in this way?

Mr. Glenvil Hall: It is part of the contract that when these Treasury deposit receipts are taken up by certain banks they can, if they so desire, withdraw the deposit before maturity for certain kinds of investments, such as tax reserve certificates and defence bonds.

Mr. Norman Smith: Will the right hon Gentleman discontinue such contracts?

Oral Answers to Questions — STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS ACT

Mr. Eric Fletcher: asked the Secretary to the Treasury when it is intended to bring into force the provisions of the Statutory Instruments Act.

Mr. Glenvil Hall: I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir J. Mellor) on Monday last.

Oral Answers to Questions — GREYHOUND RACING (JUVENILES)

Mr. Austin: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information, of a general character, he has of the numbers of juveniles attending greyhound racetracks; and whether he is now in a position to approve and embody in a Bill the substance of a short draft Bill providing for the exclusion of juveniles under 18 years of age from greyhound racetracks, forwarded to him by the hon. Member for Stretford.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Ede): In reply to the first part of the Question, I can only say that the experience of the Metropolitan Police is that in London the proportion of persons under 18 attending greyhound racing tracks is very small. On the second point, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave him on 12th December last.

Mr. Austin: Is my right hon. Friend aware that many responsible bodies differ from him on the estimate which he has

just given, and, in view of the fact that the Government have committed to their care 30,000 destitute children, will he not take into account the welfare of the children of the country and protect them from this unwholesome atmosphere?

Mr. Ede: I cannot imagine any more responsible authority on a matter of this kind than the Metropolitan Police, and my observation of the crowds going to and from greyhound race tracks confirms their view, that the number of young persons attending under the age of 18 is very small indeed.

Oral Answers to Questions — ALIENS (PERSONAL CASE)

Mr. Levy: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that Mr. Simon Groshut, who served in the British Army and was for four years a prisoner of war in Germany, has now received an offer of employment here, which was his Department's condition of admitting him; and whether he will now allow him to come and rejoin his wife, who has four years' service in the A.T.S., and has a British baby hitherto separated from its father.

Mr. Ede: I dealt fully with this case in my answer of 10th October, and stated that admission could only be authorised for employment for which the Minister of Labour was prepared to grant a permit. As my hon. Friend knows the Minister has not been able to grant a permit in respect of the particular employment offered.

Mr. Levy: Is my right hon. Friend aware that this condition, which would not have been imposed on this man if he had been a Pole who had served in the German Army, is tantamount to final exclusion, because it really is not easy for a man to obtain the offer of a job here from a distance of 2,000 miles, and if, when by a miracle he does so, he is to be refused it because it is the wrong one, what is he to do?

Mr. Ede: That is a question which should be directed to the Minister of Labour.

Oral Answers to Questions — PATERNITY ORDERS (CHILDREN'S ALLOWANCES)

Mr. Garry Allighan: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether a circular has been sent to


magistrates about the effect on maintenance allowances under paternity orders of the fact that children's allowances are now in force; and whether he will make a statement with respect to the policy governing the relation of children's allowances to such orders.

Mr. Ede: A circular on this subject was issued to clerks to justices on 31st July last, and I am having a copy placed in the Library.

Mr. Allighan: As the Home Secretary appears anxious that this circular should be taken notice of and implemented, will he insist that this is done, because I have evidence that this has not been done?

Mr. Ede: If the hon. Member can put me in touch with the cases where it is alleged that the circular is not being followed, I will take action.

Oral Answers to Questions — MID-WEEK SPORT

Sir I. Fraser: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it clear that amateur football clubs such as those connected with works, youth movements, etc., may play their games at any convenient time even if a charge is made for onlookers.

Mr. Ede: I would refer the hon. Member to the announcement issued from the Home Office on 26th March which made it clear that the Government has no desire to prevent the playing of games such as he describes, provided they are not likely to attract as spectators people who would otherwise be engaged in production.

Sir I. Fraser: In view of the fact that it cannot be guaranteed that even one or two persons engaged in production will go to see their boys play football, cannot the right hon. Gentleman be more specific? Will he have in mind that it is a bad thing to prevent this kind of innocent game, even if it does attract one or two?

Mr. Ede: I am sure that if it was only one or two, the spirit of the Government's announcement would be complied with. The Football Association and the central bodies dealing with the organisation of other sports have given guidance to their affiliated clubs which carries out the spirit of the Government's desire.

Mr. Hollis: Does the Minister think that any amateur football clubs should he excluded from playing mid-week?

Mr. Ede: I am not going to give a general answer of that kind.

Oral Answers to Questions — DRIVING DISQUALIFICATION

Mrs. Middleton: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that Section 35 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, imposes disqualification from driving for 12 months unless the Court for special reasons thinks fit to order otherwise; that magistrates have, for the last 17 years, been treating circumstances of great personal hardship as a special reason entitling them to order no disqualification; that, since the recent judgment of the Divisional Court in Whitthall v. Kirby, they cannot do this, even if disqualification will deprive a man of his livelihood; and whether, in these circumstances, he will consider introducing a short amending Bill to restore to the magistrates discretion in these cases.

Mr. Ede: I am not aware of any ground for the suggestion that all courts throughout the country have been adopting a different interpretation of the law from that which has now been authoritatively stated in the judgment to which my hon. Friend refers. Many courts have acted upon a correct view of the law. The question of amending the Road Traffic Acts is one for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport, and I understand that he sees no reason to consider amendment of the provisions which Parliament in the interest of road safety saw fit to enact in 1930.

Mrs. Middleton: Is my right hon. Friend aware that that is a discretion which everyone thought that magistrates had under the 1930 Act until quite recently; and will he do what Parliament in those days certainly intended should be done?

Mr. Ede: I was a Member of the House in 1930, and I am quite sure that, at that time, the House was appalled by the amount of death and injury which was caused on the roads by people who drove when they were under the influence of drink. In fact, a part of the difficulty was that under the previous requirement a man had to be drunk before he was convicted, and the doctors said that they did not know what "drunk" was. It was


a colloquial term, and, therefore, the phrase in the Act was adopted to make quite certain that people should not be driving on the roads with these lethal weapons, when they were not to a fit state to control them.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHILD ADOPTION

Commander Noble: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider modifying the existing regulations which require parents within the Empire wishing to adopt a child from this country to come and reside here first.

Mr. Ede: A court is required, before making an adoption order under the Adoption of Children Act, 1926, to be satisfied that it will be for the welfare of the child. As generally it would be impracticable for a court to make adequate and reliable inquiries in respect of applicants living abroad, the Act provides that adoption orders, which confer on adopters irrevocable rights of parenthood, should be made only in favour of persons who are resident and domiciled in this country. British children may, however, go abroad for adoption by British subjects provided that a licence is granted under Section 11 of the Adoption of Children (Regulation) Act, 1939. Legalisation of the adoption then depends on the law in force in the prospective adopter's country of domicile.

Commander Noble: Is it in tact the case that a child may be adopted within the Empire without prospective parents having to come to this country?

Mr. Ede: Yes, but certain proceedings have to be conducted before the Chief Magistrate at Bow Street before the child is allowed to emigrate.

Oral Answers to Questions — STANDON FARM SCHOOL (INQUIRY)

Mr. Hector Hughes: asked the Secretary for the Home Department whether he proposes to institute an inquiry into the conditions obtaining at the Standon Farm school before the crime of 15th February was committed.

Mr. Ede: Yes, Sir. I have appointed the hon. and learned Member for Exeter

(Mr. Maude) and my hon. Friend the Member for York (Dr. Corlett) to investigate and report on the state of discipline prevailing at the school before the crime of 15th February was committed by some of the boys, on the relations between the staff and the pupils of the school, and on all such facts and circumstances connected with the conduct of the school as may throw light on the causes contributing to the crime, including amongst other matters the arrangements for keeping arms and ammunition at the school; and to make such recommendations as they may think desirable having regard to the results of their inquiry.

Mr. Hughes: Would my right hon. hon. Friend consider extending the scope of the inquiry so as to include other schools, in order that some general rules may be laid down with regard to the conduct of these schools?

Mr. Ede: No, Sir. I am quite sure that the House is concerned at this particular episode, and I have endeavoured to secure the services of two hon. Members who, I hope, will carry the confidence of the House, to inquire into this specific case. I have provided terms of reference so wide that they can make recommendations of a general nature if they feel so inclined, when they have heard the evidence.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC HEALTH

Local Dental Committees

Mr. Baird: asked the Minister of Health if dentists employed in the public service are eligible to serve on the local dental committees being set up under the national health Acts.

The Minister of Health (Mr. Aneurin Bevan): Yes, Sir, subject to the terms of employment in any particular case, though they would, no doubt, as an act of courtesy, seek the consent of the employing authority. It is my hope that these committees will be fully representative of dentists in the localities, and I trust that no unnecessary obstacles will be raised.

Mr. Baird: Is it the case that the meetings which elected these committees were called by the secretaries of the local insurance committees on the instructions of


the Minister? Is it a fact that the conveners of these meetings did, in certain instances, state that public dental officers were ineligible to serve on local dental committees, and were, in fact, disfranchised, and will my right hon. Friend take steps to declare those elections null and void?

Mr. Bevan: If my hon. Friend will give me particulars, I will see what I can do to be of assistance.

Streptomycin (Radio Appeals)

Mr. Gammans: asked the Minister of Health why it is necessary to make radio appeals for streptomycin for urgent cases of illness; and why, if the supplies of this drug are limited, they are not retained centrally in a number of hospitals all over the country so that doctors and institutions in need of the drug, would know where to apply without a radio appeal.

Mr. Bevan: I am not responsible for these appeals, which I think give a wrong impression to the public. My views have been made plain in a statement issued by my Department on 22nd January, 1947, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy. The limited supplies available are allotted to the treatment of patients in the clinical trials organised at selected hospitals by the Medical Research Council.

Mr. Gammans: Has the Minister no power to centralise these supplies, because it seems fantastic that a person's life should depend on whether or not a particular hospital has a radio set?

Mr. Bevan: I have already said that the advice I have received does not go to show that patients' lives are necessarily dependent on the supplies of this drug. I very much deprecate false hopes being raised among poor people and sick people by appeals of this sort.

Oral Answers to Questions — FLOODING, RIVER SEVERN

Mr. Turner-Samuels: asked the Minister of Agriculture what steps he proposes to take to avoid or minimise the effects of any possible future flooding of the Severn; and whether, in this connection, he will convene a conference of all the local and other authorities concerned

with a view to immediate action on this matter.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture (Mr. Collick): Under the Land Drainage Act, 1930, the responsible authority is the River Severn Catchment Board. Several large improvement schemes are in preparation by the Board, including one to deal with the river between Gloucester and Tewkesbury. My Department is in close touch with the Board and will give all possible help, and I doubt whether a special conference would facilitate the progress of the work.

Mr. Turner-Samuels: Does the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that great advantage might be derived from a conference, in order to explore the immediate position?

Mr. Collick: I understand that the Board have quite a lot of work, which has been suspended during the war, which they are expecting to put in hand, but we are not of the opinion that an immediate conference would serve any useful purpose.

Mr. De la Bère: Would it be possible to do something to expedite it? It is very important.

Oral Answers to Questions — REQUISITIONED HOUSE, LONDON

Mr. Erroll: asked the Minister of Works if he is aware that the continued requisitioning of 21, Portland Place, London, W.1, for office purposes is compelling the lessee to occupy the flat over the garage in the rear of the house, which is quite inadequate to house his family: and if he will take steps to have the premises derequisitioned at an early date so that the lessee may return to his home.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works (Mr. Durbin): These premises are in course of preparation for occupation by a staff of the Ministry of Health, and while I regret the inconvenience to the lessee I am unable to arrange for the premises to be derequisitioned at an early date.

Mr. Erroll: Does the Minister think it right that a Government Department should squat in a private house in peacetime?

Mr. Durbin: This is not a case which compares, on compassionate grounds, with other cases, and the provision of accommodation for the Ministry of Health is necessary in order to deal with the housing needs of poorer people.

Mr. Erroll: Is it sleeping accommodation?

Oral Answers to Questions — SOUTH AFRICAN FRUIT IMPORTS

Sir W. Smithers: asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that, recently, peaches were bought retail in South Africa at 3d. each and plums at 6d. per lb.; that quantities of this fruit were loaded into a ship and the retail prices. in London were, peaches 1s. 6d. each and plums 45. per lb.; if he will explain this increase; and to whom the profit accrues.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food (Dr. Edith Summer-skill): Peaches and plums are imported not by the Ministry but on private account, under open general licence, and they are not price controlled. These fruits coming from South Africa, however, are brought in only through the agency of the South African Deciduous Fruit Board and are handled by the Board's representative in the United Kingdom.

Sir W. Smithers: Is it not a fact that when this fruit arrives it does not remain the property of the importer; it has to go to the pool?

Dr. Summerskill: I would remind the hon. Member that this is an example of private enterprise.

Sir W. Smithers: The hon. Lady has not answered my question.

Oral Answers to Questions — SOVIET-BORN BRITISH WIVES

Mr. Gammans: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if steps have been taken at the Conference of Foreign Ministers in Moscow to raise with the Government of the U.S.S.R. the question of granting visas to the Soviet-born wives of British Servicemen and others who are at present being detained in the U.S.S.R.

The Minister of State (Mr. McNeil): This subject was raised at Moscow by

my right hon. Friend, unfortunately without success.

Mr. Gammans: Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that these men are never likely to see their wives again, and that this harsh treatment towards British ex-Servicemen who served in Russia during the war makes a complete mockery of the Treaty with Russia and of the friendship which the people of this country have shown towards Russia, and cannot he say what the Government are going to do further about this matter?

Mr. McNeil: Without necessarily agreeing with the implications of what the hon. Member said about the Treaty, I should say that my right hon. Friend takes the gravest view of this unjustifiable behaviour, and has made representations on the highest level on this subject, and will consider if any further steps can be taken.

Earl Winterton: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the most intense indignation has been caused, quite irrespective of party, in all parts of the House, and will he take note that some of us, quite irrespective of party, will raise this matter again and again until we get satisfaction?

Major Beamish: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman what reason the Soviet Government gave for refusing to allow these women to come to England?

Mr. McNeil: I should like notice of that question.

Sir I. Fraser: Could not an approach be made to the Russian Parliamentarians who are now here?

Mr. McNeil: I am of the opinion that that is being done

Mr. Gammans: Will the Foreign Secretary, who is in Moscow, point out that it is not merely a question of justice and equity, and also give some idea how indignant people of all classes in England feel about this matter?

Mr. McNeil: My right hon. Friend will doubtless be reinforced by the interest and indignation which, I agree, has been shown in all parts of the House.

Mr. Vane: Has the right hon. Gentleman considered keeping the wives of the Russian Delegation here as a reprisal?

Oral Answers to Questions — TEA (MAINTENANCE OF RATION)

Mr. Walter Fletcher (by Private Notice): asked the Minister of Food whether he is satisfied that the stocks of tea existing in this country, together with recent contracts with India and Ceylon, are sufficient to maintain the present tea ration?

The Minister of Food (Mr. Strachey): Contracts with the growers in India and Ceylon are still in course of negotiation. As to stocks, there are difficulties, mainly due to a delay in shipments from Calcutta owing to a strike. It is too early to say whether or not, in view of these difficulties, the present level of distribution can be maintained during the summer months.

Mr. Fletcher: In view of the fact that the Minister has, on many occasions, refused, in the public interest, to give the size and distribution of stocks in this country, will he now state whether, in fact, we are going to see, in the case of tea, what we have seen in the case of other commodities—a reluctance on his part to take the public into his confidence in a matter which affects nearly every home in this country? Will he further state whether this doubt as to the tea ration being maintained at its present level does not arise from the action by the Ceylon and Indian Governments both in raising their prices, and, possibly, imposing export duties and other measures which will work against the interests of this country?

Mr. Strachey: Yes, Sir. Without wishing to criticise the actions of the Ceylon and Indian Governments, I should say that, certainly, those actions are unwelcome to us. We would have preferred to continue the system of bulk purchase, which was working extremely well. A difficulty arises now, owing to the action of the Ceylon and Indian Governments, in that this system may well have to be modified to a considerable degree.

Mr. R. S. Hudson: Has it not occurred to the right hon. Gentleman that the action of the Ceylon and Indian Governments may well he one effect of bulk buying?

Mr. Strachey: The answer to that question is in the negative. On the contrary, bulk buying was working extremely well and producing very good results for this country.

Mr. Hudson: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he will be able to announce a decision whether or not the tea ration is going to be maintained? This is a matter of great importance to the British public.

Mr. Strachey: All I can say is that it is too early at the moment. It depends on whether the strike in Calcutta is settled. This is mainly governed by the actual rate of shipments at the moment.

Mr. Paget: Does the Minister feel that the present situation would have been improved if he had taken the advice of the party opposite and taken tea off the ration?

Mr. Strachey: That, of course, would have led to disaster.

Mr. Eden: This is a very grave matter. Could not the right hon. Gentleman really carry us a little further as to when he can tell the country what is the position? It is not a question whether it could or could not have been avoided, but, surely, it is most unfortunate, just before Easter, for the public to have news of one more cut?

Mr. Strachey: The right hon. Gentleman must not suggest that I have announced any such cut. I was asked whether I was satisfied that the present level of tea could be maintained during the summer. As our tea supplies, at the moment, from our major source, Calcutta, are not coming in owing to the strike, it would be most rash to say that we are sure that distribution could be maintained, and all I did was to say that I could make no decision. I repeat that it will depend on what happens in this dispute in Calcutta.

Mr. Eden: Has the right hon. Gentleman bought the tea, does he possess it, and is it only a question of the strike holding it up?

Mr. Strachey: The answer is, as I have said twice now, that the strike in Calcutta is the main and immediate matter. As I have stated, there are other longer-term issues of our contracts with the growers in India and Ceylon, and a change has been made there which may affect in either direction, as a matter of fact, the actual amount of tea which we will secure over the year as a whole.

Commander Galbraith: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how long the strike has been going on and what amount of tea has been held up?

Mr. Strachey: I cannot give the figures without notice.

Mr. Driberg: If it is necessary to cut the tea ration, will my right hon. Friend do all he can to make plans in advance to retain it at its present level for old people, who have few enough comforts, even with the considerably increased pension which the Labour Government have given them?

Mr. Strachey: I will take that into careful consideration.

Mr. W. Fletcher: When the Minister makes his statement, with which he seems to be pregnant at present, will he say how the very heavy increase in the price of tea will be handled, and whether it will be passed on to the consumer or hidden in a food subsidy? Will he state whether it is not much more important than the strike in Calcutta, which he seems to be using as a smoke screen?

Mr. Strachey: The strike in Calcutta is our immediate and pressing anxiety, but the action of the Indian and Ceylon Governments, in causing the system of bulk purchase to be modified, is also a very unwelcome development.

Mr. Walkden: As he gave us generous information last year about this purchase of tea, will the right hon. Gentleman be able, at a later date, to tell us whether, if the strike is settled at an early date,

the purchase of tea in India and Ceylon will be sufficient to maintain the ration, say, during the forthcoming winter?

Mr. Strachey: I have said that the contracts with the growers in India and Ceylon are still under negotiation, and I certainly cannot give a report on them until they are completed.

Mr. Walkden: Will the right hon. Gentleman give us that information when he has it?

Lord John Hope: Does not the right hon. Gentleman owe it to the public to express these anxieties on his own initiative, rather than have them dragged out of him by the House?

Mr. Strachey: As a matter of fact, I have sounded a warning note on tea, which may have escaped the hon. Member's attention. I have done so, and I propose to do so on future occasions.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke: Why have tea stocks been allowed to run so low that a short-term strike in Calcutta could have such a marked effect?

Mr. Strachey: The strike in Calcutta is the short-term fact. The level of the purchases which we can make over the year will be governed, of course, by the contracts now under negotiation with the growers in India and Ceylon, principally, and we shall keep our stocks up to the maximum possible levels.

DEATH SENTENCES, COLONIES (LEGAL PROCEDURE)

The Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Creech Jones): In view of the exceptional course which the Gold Coast murder case has taken and the public concern that has been shown in regard to it, I desire to make a statement regarding procedure in capital cases from the Colonies. In the first place, it must be clearly understood that the responsibility of deciding whether or not sentence of death should be postponed is a matter which rests within the discretion of the Governor concerned who alone is in a position to take a decision in all the circumstances involved.
It is clear that as a matter of law, the fact that an application for leave to appeal to, the Privy Council has been lodged constitutes no legal barrier against the carrying out of the death sentence. This has been repeatedly decided by the Privy Council. On the other hand, the fact that an application for leave to appeal is being made is plainly one of the facts which a Governor would take into consideration in deciding whether or not to postpone the carrying out of the sentence, and the normal practice which Governors have followed in the event of such an application being brought to their notice has been to postpone sentence pending the hearing of the application. This practice will no doubt continue, but the Government's view is that in the future if a Governor comes to the conclusion that any application for leave to appeal is without real substance, he should not allow the mere fact that an application is pending to affect his judgment in the carrying out of the death sentence.
It is, however, of the utmost importance that where a Governor decides to postpone sentence pending the hearing of an application, the proceedings should be so conducted as to enable the application to be disposed of in the quickest possible time. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council already have a rule requiring a petition to be lodged with the least possible delay, but the Government propose to consider whether more definite provisions should not be made to secure this object. I am in communication with the Lord Chancellor and the Law Officers on the whole matter.

Mr. Oliver Stanley: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, first of all, when he

expects to be in a position to announce what action is to be taken; and, secondly, whether, as this covers only one small part of this question, he proposes at some time to make a fuller statement covering all the matters in dispute; and whether he will make that statement in such a way that it will give an opportunity for debate?

Mr. Creech Jones: This is merely an interim statement to reassure the public that the whole problem is being looked into in the light of the criticism which has been made in regard to these proceedings. Therefore, this statement deals only with one part of the problem. I hope that as quickly as possible a fuller statement can be made on all the aspects of this matter, and I trust that facilities will be made available to the House for discussion on the problem.

Mr. Rankin: I am sorry that I did not get the full implications of the right hon. Gentleman's statement. It was just through not hearing the words. I should be obliged if he would make one point clear. So far as I understand the position, the Governor decided not to proceed with the execution of the full penalty in the case of two—

Hon. Members: Speech.

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Gentleman must put quite clearly in a question what he wants made clear.

Mr. Rankin: I will put it this way. Is the Minister aware that the reason that has been given for not proceeding with the execution of the capital sentence in the case of the two who have been more or less—

Mr. Speaker: That does not arise at the moment. The statement which has been made had to do with the legal procedure which arises out of this case.

Mr. Paget: Will the Minister distinguish between two perfectly separate things? First, there is the petition to the Privy Council upon the conviction itself, which is part of the machinery of an appeal against a conviction. Second, there are various applications which can be made attacking the committal or by way of certiorari which can be prolonged indefinitely. Will the Minister make it quite clear that although the petition by way of appeal is a ground for postponing the


sentence, the various other machineries whereby appeals can be made to the Privy Council upon matters which do not directly affect conviction itself should not be grounds for suspending sentence?

Mr. Creech Jones: It would be wiser if my hon. Friend referred to the statement I have made. It has been most carefully stated. Obviously the matter of postponement is within the discretion of the Governor himself. That is the legal position at the present moment. What is intended by this statement is to prevent unnecessary delay and any deliberate effort to prevent the proper running of the course of the processes of justice.

Mr. Paget: The Minister's statement did not distinguish between the two types of appeal. Will the Minister be very careful to see that nothing goes from him which would encourage the carrying out of the sentence when there is an appeal against the sentence, merely because the Governor does not think it is a good one?

Mr. Creech Jones: I think I have made the position perfectly clear in the reply I have given, and I ask my hon. Friend to read it very carefully. If he is still in disagreement with the statement, there will be an opportunity to raise the matter later when the House debates it.

Mr. Hector Hughes: When the Minister makes the fuller statement, will he do his best to make a statement which will cover all the Colonies so that there may be a general rule to see that justice is carried out with quickness and certainty?

Mr. Creech Jones: That is the problem to which we are addressing ourselves at the moment, but the statement I have made will be applicable in respect of all the Colonies.

Mr. E. Fletcher: Will the Minister in his further statement clear up the point whether the final responsibility for exercising the Prerogative of mercy rests with the Colonial Governor in question, or whether there is in certain circumstances a residual appeal to the Colonial Secretary to advise on the exercise of the Prerogative?

Mr. Creech Jones: That point has already been raised, and it is, I think, obviously one of those points which the

House should get absolutely clear in its mind when the matter is debated.

Mr. Henry Usborne: Would not the simplest solution be to abolish the barbarous punishment of the capital sentence?

Mr. Turner-Samuels: Will the Minister see that the new machinery which is to be provided will make it absolutely impossible in future for men to be taken out half a dozen times in order to be executed?

SNOW AND FLOOD LOSSES (AGRICULTURE)

Government Plans and Assistance

The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Thomas Williams): I will, with permission, make a further statement about agricultural losses due to snow, frost and floods, and the steps which the Government are taking to assist farmers to recover as soon and as fully as possible from these grave setback to food production.
Taking the country as a whole, the pressure of flood waters on our embanked river systems has greatly eased in the past 10 days. Most of the breaches in the embankments have been closed or are in process of being closed, but the position remains one of great difficulty an the east bank of the River Trent below Gainsborough and in the Yorkshire Ouse Catchment Area. My Department has been in constant contact with the catchment boards concerned with a view to providing all possible help. Material assistance from Government resources has been sent to the Trent Catchment Area, where it is essential that the breach at Morton should be closed before the high tides at the end of this week.
Many waterlogged areas in the Fens have already been cleared or will be cleared in the next few days. It will take longer to clear those areas which have been deeply inundated through breaches in the embankments, but the work is being pressed on night and day. Some 75 heavy pumping units mobilised by my Department have already been sent out and are working or being erected. Many more are being prepared and will be brought into early operation.
It is still only possible to give a rough interim estimate of losses of stock and


crops due to winter weather and floods. The losses of livestock, particularly hill sheep and lambs, due to exposure and starvation cannot yet be accurately assessed; losses of crops and stock due to floods are still taking place in some areas; even where the floods have started to recede it is still too early to estimate the extent of the damage.
My present information, however, is that losses of sheep and lambs in England and Wales total over 2 millions. About 32 per cent. of hill sheep and 7 per cent. of lowland sheep have been lost. Some counties have lost half their sheep. About 30,000 store cattle have also been lost.
Floods in 31 counties have inundated some 600,000 acres of agricultural land, that is, an area equal to the size of the county of Kent. About 70,000 acres of winter corn—almost all wheat—have been destroyed by floods and about 200,000 acres by frost. About 50,000 tons of potatoes have been destroyed by the floods, and a further 30,000 by frost in the clamps.
Losses of this magnitude would in any circumstances constitute an unparalleled disaster to the agricultural community and the nation. Coming at the time of food shortage as well as dollar shortage they bring us face to face with a situation which will require all our energy and resolution to meet and overcome. The Government have given earnest and argent consideration to the many problems which arise.
First, there is the human problem of the personal distress and losses caused by the floods. The Prime Minister informed the House on 24th March of the immediate relief measures set in operation to assist in relieving distress. As further announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 25th March, the Government are contributing £1 million to the Lord Mayor's Fund. This fund is available for the relief of farmers and farm workers, as well as urban householders, who have lost personal belongings and household goods in the floods. The loss of crops and stock and the means of production is a purely agricultural problem which the Agricultural Disaster Fund, launched by the National Farmers' Union of England and Wales, is designed to alleviate. Losses of this description are a matter of grave concern to the

nation, not only by reason of the hardship involved to individual farmers, but because of the serious effect on food production.
The Government consider that it is a matter of national importance that food production in the areas which have suffered these heavy losses should be restored at the earliest practicable moment. To this end they will contribute to the Agricultural Disaster Fund a sum approximately equivalent to that raised by subscription and will co-operate closely with the National Farmers' Union in the administration of the Fund. Urgent interim payments will be made from the Fund. A suggestion is being explored with the National Farmers' Union and the other organisations concerned that farmers throughout the country should be invited to contribute either by way of specified deductions over a period of twelve months from payments due to them on the sale of their products to a Government Department or Marketing Board or other central agency, or from acreage payments, or in other cases through appropriate channels.
In addition, in order to encourage maximum production for the forthcoming harvest, the Government have decided to assist farmers whose lands have been subject to abnormal flooding to carry the risk of a poor crop which may result from late sowing and the condition of the land. A scheme for making special acreage payments in such cases is being worked out in consultation with the Emergency Advisory Committee which I set up ten days ago and the details will be announced at an early date. While reducing the farmer's risk, this payment will give him every incentive to produce the best crop he can. The rates of payment will be based on a rough estimate of what the general loss of yield is likely to be as a result of the late sowing or planting and the state of the land as a result of the floods. Farmers can, therefore, make their plans on the assumption that the payments will make it well worth their while to grow crops where the land is in reasonably fit condition for cultivation, and where the date of sowing or planting is not hopelessly late.
Hill farmers will be eligible for relief in respect of direct losses from the Agricultural Disaster Fund. But the rebuilding of their flocks is necessarily a slow


process. The Government have, therefore, decided to adapt the hill sheep subsidy scheme to deal with this entirely abnormal situation. Hill farmers can, therefore, be assured of suitable relief and will, I hope, be encouraged to start recovery from the wreckage caused by this disastrous winter in the knowledge that they will not be without financial assistance in their difficulties. Details of this scheme will also be announced shortly. So far as we can we are re-distributing stocks of fodder and feedingstuffs to give as much immediate practical aid as possible.
To supplement other sources of credit the Agricultural Goods Services Scheme will continue to be available. The scheme will be widened to include livestock, so that it may be used for restocking sheep farms. It is proposed under the Agriculture Bill to extend the scheme, both for livestock and other goods and services, beyond 31st December next, when it is due to expire.
In successive broadcasts over the past three weeks the President of the National Farmers' Union, the President of the National Union of Agricultural Workers and I have explained the gravity of the food production position in this country both to the general public and to the farmers and farm workers. The Government are doing their utmost to help. In addition to the measures of financial assistance which I have outlined above, action has been taken to secure high transport priority for urgent agricultural requisites, improved rations for farm workers, and, for the immediate future, the diversion of machines from export to the home market. I am confident that the agricultural community will do all in their power to respond to the nation's need, as they have always done in the past.

Mr. R. S. Hudson: While I welcome the broad indication of Government help over a period, will the right hon. Gentleman give us a little more detail of what the individual sufferer has to do at once? That, after all, is the important thing—how is he to proceed in getting his immediate relief? Does the right hon. Gentleman really think that the fund he mentioned, started by the N.F.U., even with Government assistance on a pound-to-pound basis, will really be adequate to

make good the losses which these unfortunate men have suffered through no fault of their own?

Mr. Williams: Having got the best estimate we can of the total losses of sheep and lambs, we think that if the N.F.U. fund rises to the point that we anticipate it may with the Government contribution, there will be sums available large enough to compensate for loss of stock.

Mr. Hudson: What is the man to do at once?

Mr. Williams: In my statement I said that immediate assistance will be made available.

Mr. Emrys Roberts: Can the Minister say whether this source of relief will be applied to hill farmers who are facing real financial hardship, if not worse than that? Such relief will be of very little assistance to the hill farmers in the remote areas of Wales. Further, if this national disaster should be a national charge, is it not highly unsatisfactory to meet it on a pound-to-pound basis of the contributions of the farmers themselves?

Mr. Williams: I think the hon. Member will be aware that in no similar case in the past has the Government made itself responsible for financial assistance at all, and this gesture on the part of the Government is, I think, a right gesture in view of the seriousness of the losses and the enormity of the troubles.

Mr. Roberts: They want more than a gesture.

Mr. M. Philips Price: Will the Minister bear in mind that, owing to the continuation of these disastrous rains right into April, large areas of the heavy clay lands in the Midlands and South-West of England have not been ploughed, and that very probably large areas will never be cultivated? Will he also bear in mind that that will also mean that next autumn and winter there will be insufficient feeding-stuffs to feed dairy cattle, and that therefore it is absolutely necessary to secure that adequate imports of feeding-stuffs are obtained, otherwise there will be mass destruction of herds next winter?

Mr. Williams: I think my hon. Friend can take it from me that we are aware of the condition of the land, North, South, East and West, and that is why we have


endeavoured to provide a scheme to underwrite the production of crops which may only reach 60 or 65 per cent. of their normal because of the nature of the land. It is the underwriting scheme that I commend to the House as the most practical piece of assistance we can give.

Sir I. Fraser: Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the desire to try to deal with this disaster nationally, within the financial limits, would best be met by allowing the law of supply and demand to operate, so that, owing to the scarcity, particularly in sheep, prices would rise? Would not that be the best way of spreading the burden over the consumers as a whole?

Mr. Williams: No, if I may say so, I think the hon. Member's suggestion would be almost as disastrous to agriculture in the long run as the shortage itself.

Mr. Stubbs: Is the Minister aware that in the Willingham and Cottenham area, particularly at Over, there is a feeling that nothing short of a local inquiry should be held, and held at once? Further, as he has said nothing about it this morning, will he look at the point of dealing with the question of flooding from a national point of view? I think the farmers would agree now that as a result of this disaster there is only one real solution, and that is to nationalise the waterways of the country.

Mr. Speaker: This is going very far from the original statement.

Mr. Eden: May I ask another question? It must be in all our minds, following the very serious statement made by the Minister and in view of the plight of the industry—I agree with what has been said by hon. Members below the Gangway—whether, as a result of the conditions, the right hon. Gentleman can assure the House that sufficient supplies of labour will be available to the industry this year to enable it to meet these wholly abnormal conditions and the urgent need for the output of the industry?

Mr. Williams: I think I can give that assurance to the right hon. Gentleman at once. We are fully aware of the needs of manpower, both for sowing and harvesting, when the time comes. As far as we can organise available supplies of labour, including prisoners of war, the Ministry

of Agriculture will have the first call. Because of that I can give the assurance that when the harvest period comes we shall have sufficient labour.

Earl Winterton: On a point of Order. I desire to say that, as I am the hon. Member with the first subject to be discussed on the Adjournment, I am quite prepared to forgo my rights, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, providing that other Members will do the same, so that we can discuss this matter for the next three hours.

Mr. Speaker: I am afraid that is an assumption I could not very wall make. The other hon. Members are not all here. I would suggest to the House that this is a very important statement, and it would be better if hon. Members were to read it carefully. Then as soon as we come back, at the first opportunity. I have no doubt it will have to be debated.

Major Legge-Bourke: Further to your Ruling, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that His Majesty's Government seem to appreciate that this is a national disaster, would it not be desirable that some arrangements should be made whereby this matter could be discussed rather earlier than has been intended? I know it is not possible to move the Adjournment of the House today for the discussion of a matter of urgent public importance, but I suggest that the Adjournment might be moved on Budget Day. It is customary for the House to adjourn after the Chancellor has made his Budget Statement. I suggest that that would be a suitable time which might be allowed for discussion of this matter of urgent public importance.

Mr. Speaker: That is not a matter for me. I cannot rule that that should be so.

Lieut.-Colonel Elliot: We have not had any statement in regard to Scotland. I take it that, in general, the Secretary of State for Scotland is associated with the Minister of Agriculture in the statement he has made, and in the remedies proposed? But I notice that the Secretary of State has not been able to give any estimate as to sheep losses in Scotland. The Minister of Agriculture gave the very heavy figure of 30 per cent. losses in England and Wales, and in some cases counties have lost half their stocks. I wonder whether the Secretary of State would confirm that


he is associated with the remedial measures, and also give some information as to losses in Scotland?

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Westwood): I am associated with the statement which has been made by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture. As far as we can get estimates from Scotland of losses—and they are only tentative, because it will be some time yet before we can get a full estimate, as on some of the Highlands the snows are only beginning to melt and there we are going to have a problem—the figure is approximately 10 per cent., varying from what is practically negligible in the North, up to 20 per cent. in the Border counties. Cattle losses are comparatively negligible.

Lieut.-Colonel Elliot: I am glad to hear that the losses in Scotland are not so heavy as they are in some of the English counties, all the more so as they will be necessary for stocking. Will the right hon. Gentleman keep in mind that winter is by no means over in Scotland, and in fact that snow has fallen again today, that the heavy frost has checked the growth of grass completely, and that we may still have very heavy losses before the winter is over?

Mr. Westwood: I can assure the right hon. and gallant Gentleman that these points are being kept in mind. I can also assure the House that the National Farmers' Union in Scotland are willing to co-operate, and are doing very good work in giving advice in connection with these problems.

Mr. Speaker: I think we must get on with Business, and leave to the usual channels the question of time for a Debate.

ADJOURNMENT (EASTER)

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. R. J. Taylor.]

RARE BIRDS AND MAMMALS (PRESERVATION)

12.38 p.m.

Earl Winterton: May I say, in the first instance, as I said on a previous occasion when I spoke from this Box on an Adjournment Motion, that I think, generally speaking, it is not right that a Front Bench speaker should take advantage of this Adjournment period to raise a question as it is generally regarded as providing an opportunity for back benchers. There is a second explanation which must be offered on this occasion for the benefit of those outside this House. It might be said "How strange is the procedure of the House of Commons that, after a most important statement by the Minister of Agriculture on a national disaster, a Member on the Front Bench should get up to deal with the question of preservation of rare birds." I wish to point out—and I make no complaint, Mr. Speaker, of your Ruling, which was a correct one—that I offered to give up my right to speak on the Adjournment Motion provided other Members also gave up theirs, in order that the statement of the Minister of Agriculture might be discussed.
This matter of the preservation of the rarer birds and mammals of this country is a subject which demands publicity, and publicity of the kind which can only be given through a Debate in this House. By way of parenthesis, I will say that I do not seek publicity for myself. I have had plenty of publicity, of the wrong kind, during the 42 years I have been in the House. It is only through the medium of debate—and may I take the opportunity, Sir, of thanking several hon. Members in different, parts of the House who have given valuable assistance in the matter, and who apparently will seek to catch your eye—that publicity can be given to this matter.
The only other thing I wish to say with reference to this subject generally, before coming to details, by way of giving the reason and excuse for raising the matter today, is that I think the preservation of rare birds, and even rare birds of prey, is desirable at the present time. It is at least as important a subject to discuss


in this place as the subject that is being discussed elsewhere as to whether suffragan bishops should be addressed as "My Lord Bishop," "Mr. Bishop," or "Bish." There is this much to be said about rare birds, even birds of prey—they do not, when they fly about in the air, do as much harm to their fellow birds, or at any rate to birds of the same species, as human beings do on many occasions when they fly about in the air, and they are—I say it in all seriousness—a joy to behold. In this over-urbanised country, one does not always see as much beauty about as one would like to see. For instance, the contemplation of the crowds on the underground is not always an aesthetic pleasure, whereas an eagle flying in the air always is.
I want to deal only with certain facets of this matter. I am not in the unhappy position that one sometimes is in when raising a subject on the Adjournment of having to steer a very narrow course between two precipices of keeping in Order and avoiding matters that require legislation or public expenditure, because the contentions I shall make need neither an alteration in legislation nor any public expenditure. Indeed, my whole contention is that the existing law is strong enough, if properly interpreted and enforced, and if the Government will give their aid, in the shape of laying down conditions on Government-owned land and property, especially the proposed national parks, that these birds and animals shall be protected. I am very much obliged to the Home Secretary for being here; his presence is most valuable, since I have certain points to put to him. I think the first way to protect these birds, which are in danger of extinction in this country, is to have an energetic application of the laws protecting them and the fullest use of their powers by county councils under the Wild Birds Protection Acts. I know that the Home Office, very naturally, is very reluctant to interfere with the discretion of local authorities, but I hope that, as the outcome of this Debate, the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary will give consideration to circularising local police authorities throughout the country, and that the same will be done in Scotland, calling attention to the necessity of seeing that the Wild Birds Protection Acts are enforced, and also calling attention to the need, under the Wild Birds Protection

Acts, of making full use of their provisions. As those interested in the subject will be aware, there is an option given to county councils by which they can apply the Act in its most stringent form or in a less stringent form. This does not require legislation; it is purely an act by them.
The two birds which most require protection, and whose future is literally threatened, are kites and golden eagles. The hon. Member for the Forest of Dean (Mr. Philips Price) is familiar with the Western counties and Wales, and I think he will agree with me that there are today only three or four pairs of kites nesting in Wales. It is computed that they have not increased in number during the last 10 or 15 years. They have to be most carefully guarded. I would not dream of saying where they are to be found. At one time they were common throughout England, and there are accounts, as late as Carolian times and the time of James II, of kites being seen all round London. As to the golden eagle, it is a bird which is almost symbolic in Scotland. One feels, when one sees it soaring and volplaning in the sky on one of those occasional cerulean blue days in the West of Scotland, even in the rainiest part, that it expresses the grandeur, the spirit and the combativeness of the Scottish race. It would be a terrible thing if the golden eagle were to become extinct.
I have quotations from some of the experts, but owing to the lack of time, I do not propose to read them to the House. I have consulted several authorities on this subject, and in the opinion of many experts, although not all of them, for there are differences of opinion, the golden eagle is in danger of extinction in the next 30 years. I have an erudite article from the "Aberdeen Press and Journal" by Mr. Leslie Brown, a well—known authority on bird life in. the Highlands, in which he expresses an opinion that that is the case. He says in his article, quite properly and very accurately, that they are in danger from three sources. They are in danger from gamekeepers and shepherds. I will not say anything about that, for I can appreciate the views of both gamekeepers on grouse moors and shepherds on any birds of prey, even a bird as rare and magnificent as the golden eagle. But they are in as much danger, and probably more danger, from egg collectors. I want to say something about


these people, and I will begin, I am sure with the assent of hon. Members on both sides of the House, by describing egg collectors as thieves and gangsters whose business it is to break the law and steal the eggs of rare birds in this country. I have an extract from the "Daily Mail" showing that, at the present time, extensive plans are being made by these illegal depredators of golden eagles to try and obtain eggs, and that the Association of Bird Watchers and Wardens are taking what steps are open to them to prevent it. I know the immense pressure there is on the police authorities, the Home Office and the Home Secretary, but I hope that efforts will be made to chase these people and prosecute them. What pleasure is there in robbing the nest of a rare bird in this country in order that one may afterwards look at the eggs in a collection?

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: Will the noble Lord bring out the point that these dastardly thieves in many cases are offered as much as £10 a clutch for these particular eggs—and eagles, of course, lay only two eggs? It is a shocking state of affairs.

Earl Winterton: I quite agree that it is a shocking state of affairs and I can only say that the people who offer these sums and collect eggs have brains as empty as the eggs in their collection. In them all sense of decency is completely absent. I think that, as a result of this Debate today, it may be possible to frighten these people to some extent. I am sure that every hon. Member will agree with me that the feeling of the House, especially when it is expressed irrespective of party, does have an effect on nefarious practices of this kind. I hope that, as a result of this Debate, it may be possible to do something to stop these practices.
I want to deal very shortly with one or two other rare birds and animals. In the opinion of most ornithologists—I quote, as an example, a friend of mine, Lord David Bute—buzzards and ravens should be protected because, on the whole, they do far more good than harm, especially buzzards, and if protected, they spread. There is a very interesting example of this in one of the Home Counties, which I will not quote, but I will say that not 45 miles from this place—the right hon. Gentleman the Home

Secretary will know where it is—buzzards have been reintroduced in the last six years from Wales, have bred there, and that it is now computed that they number some nine or 10 out of the original lot that were brought there. They have bred there for the last two or three years, so they can be reintroduced. Now the osprey; it is possible that the osprey could be reintroduced into this country, although I do not think that is a matter which it would be proper to raise here, it is more a question for the enterprise of some bird protection society. I would like to call attention to the fact that the bittern has been successfully protected in Norfolk, and is now even said to be increasing.
The wild animals which require protection in this country if they are not to become extinct do not, curiously enough, include the wild cat, because I understand the wild cat is increasing in Scotland, nor the badger, which is also increasing. The badger does not require any special method of protection, although I am very much in favour of its not being killed. Two species which do require protection are the marten and the polecat, to be found in Wales, and they should be given protection. In passing, I might say, as showing how wild animals in certain circumstances will increase, that about the year 1904 wild roe deer began to appear in the Western part of the county of Sussex in which I live. It was thought at first that they had got out from a park where they are kept by the Lord Lieutenant of the county, who is a Member of another place. Evidence now shows, however, that they had not got out from his park, but had spread across the county from the New Forest and even further West, from parts of the Black-moor Vale where, I believe, a few were turned out many years ago. It is a most interesting fact which should be brought out as relevant to the subject I have raised that there is now a chain of wild roe deer—if chain is the right word—from the West Country right across Hampshire and Dorset into Sussex, and extending as far even as Kent. In fact, they are almost too numerous and give a certain amount of trouble in forestry areas, but it shows what can be done, and how wild animals will increase if left alone.
My last point is this. I am sure the right hon. Gentleman has listened with


sympathetic ears to my plea that everything should be done to see that the existing law is carried out in an effort to prevent the illegal destruction of wild birds, and I hope the next point I want to make will meet with the same favourable consideration on the part of the right hon. Gentleman and the Government. Some time ago the Government announced through the Chanceller of the Exchequer the new form of national park which it is intended to set up in this country. I very much hope that, when those national parks are in a part of the world which would be suitable for the purpose, that is to say the wilder parts of Yorkshire, Lancashire, Westmorland, Cumberland, Northumberland and Wales, a part should be set aside as an animal, bird and nature sanctuary. I think it is of extreme importance, and there is no reason why, if a park were set up in Northumberland, there should not be introduced into it some wild cats from Scotland or, if available, martens and polecats from Wales. If it were objected that it is rather hard on the neighbouring farmers to introduce birds and beasts of prey, I would point out what our fellow subjects do in the Dominions, particularly in the Union of South Africa, where there is a national park in which lions and leopards are encouraged. People farm quite peaceably next door to it, and believe that any inconvenience caused by the larger animls and birds of prey found in South Africa is amply compensated by the fact that, if they were not so protected, certain animals would become extinct. Why could we not do the same in our own national parks? It would not in any way interfere with the amenities of the public if we had a national preservation park, as we find in the Dominions, where rare birds, animals and indeed plants could be protected.
I had not intended to refer to plants, but they again are subject to most appalling depredations and illegal conduct on the part of collectors. The people who collect rare orchids and plants are in exactly the same moral—or, rather, immoral—category as those who collect the eggs of rare birds. A short time ago a certain rambling society in my part of the world mentioned to me, when they were writing for permission to pay their annual visit to my property in Sussex, a certain wood where there were

certain very rare plants. In the letter, which was marked "Private," the Secretary of the society said:
I very much hope that you will not let anybody in the neighbourhood, or anywhere, know about this, because I can assure you that if it becomes known people will come down from London on a moonlight night and will dig up the whole of these rare plants in order to sell them to collectors.
That is why I say it is most necessary that these plants also should be preserved.
I am very grateful to the House for the attention they have given to this matter, and I would end by saying that these rare birds, animals and plants are worth preservation; I hope that this House, with its great authority and power of protection for those who need it, will use the strongest influence to that end.

12.57 p.m.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: I am indeed happy to be associated with the noble Lord in raising this most important matter in the House today. It is a case when I think one might even go so far as to paraphrase Shakespeare, and say:
One touch of nature makes the whole House kin.
I agree in that connection with the noble Lord when he said what a relief it was to turn aside from party wrangling and occasionally to gather up in this House in such a Debate as this the aspirations of a section of the community which, as is unfortunately the case, is so very rarely catered for. If this House is to be preserved in all its strength and in all its fullness, it seems to me vital that we should from time to time, in an entirely nonparty spirit, travel up and down the highways and the byways as we are doing today and look into questions which, to our loss, I suggest, are often ignored but which have a very definite influence on the development of our national character. The fundamental, joyous refreshment which one gets from contact with the wild life of our countryside touches the very deepest springs of the mental and spiritual life of those who make that contact. I contend therefore that the noble Lord has performed a notable public service in raising this matter, and I am delighted to have a chance of lending him, as I have already said, my fullest support for the points he has put forward.
As the noble Lord said, this subject is a very big one, and one can only therefore touch on various facets of such a


fascinating subject. I agree with the noble Lord when he suggests that the law as it stands, if properly worked out and implemented, can be a very useful instrument. The law, of course, is related primarily to the Wild Birds (Protection) Act of 1880. This and other wild bird protection measures, such as the Lapwing Protection Act, 1928, are unfortunately all that we have available in this country as a means of securing the ends which we hope to achieve as the result of the Debate.
The sad thing about it is that the provisions of the law are flouted from one end of Great Britain to the other at the present moment. I do not myself think that the Wild Birds (Protection) Act, of 1880 is a good one. Hoping not to be ruled out of Order, I might perhaps venture to express the opinion that in the not distant future something similar and more direct should take the place of that Act, something in the nature of a measure embracing the protection of all birds, and including a short black list of birds which, for one reason or another are excepted. To pursue that prospect unduly however is to tread on the narrow path which the noble Lord mentioned and which, if I followed it, would lead to my being ruled out of Order. I might say, in passing, that for once in my life I feel I can pay a tribute to the Parliament of Northern Ireland, the Wild Birds (Protection) Act there being very much better than our own.
Let me look for a moment at the situation in this country in regard to the protection of wild birds. I would rather like to extend the field of discussion which has already been covered by the noble Lord. He has pointed out that the county councils and the police authorities are not fulfilling their duties, and that benches of magistrates are not enforcing the law. Under the law as it stands, county councils have the power to make local Orders. Those orders which have been made vary very much. That is a great pity. It is patently absurd that a bird protected in one county should not be protected in a neighbouring county. What is wanted is regional collaboration among groups of counties and not the haphazard and un-thought-out independent action which is taking place at the present moment.
My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has at his disposal, for guidance and

for advice, a Wild Birds Advisory Committee. I would urge upon my right hon. Friend the necessity of having a look at the membership and activities of that committee. In my view that body needs thoroughly overhauling. In the first place, I suggest that its membership should be confined to qualified ornithologists. It is amazing to me that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is not in any way represented upon that advisory committee. As to the activities of the committee, I am astonished upon looking at several of the local Orders issued by county councils—I have some of them here—to find a mass of anomalies and absurdities. Surely one of the functions of the advisory committee should be to save the Home Secretary from making a fool of himself by endorsing Orders which are both inaccurate and unintelligent.
Let me give the House a few examples of the crass stupidity of the Orders which are current in the counties. In the Hampshire Order we find that the eggs of the grey phalarope are protected, although the bird has never been known to nest anywhere outside the Arctic Circle: In another Order kestrels are protected but their eggs are not. I find that more than one county gives protection to the eggs of the bluethroat, a bird which has never yet at any time attempted to breed in any part of Great Britain. The Order for Berkshire is wholly incomplete. That for Bedfordshire, the county much of which I have the honour to represent in this House has an Order which could be very greatly improved by being brought into line, for example, with the excellent standard set by Hertfordshire and Surrey, and even by West Sussex, of which county the noble Lord knows a great deal.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Ede): Why "even West Sussex?

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: As a matter of fact, the Order for West Sussex is not really of the very highest standard. It could be further improved. The inconsistencies which I have mentioned should be cleared up and all Orders under the Act should be revised and made to conform to the best standard, making allowances for those regional differences involved in the habitats of the birds affected. Rather an amusing sidelight on this matter, and one of which I should like to tell the House, is that the attractive


whitethroat is fully protected everywhere, although it never arrives in this country before April, and it leaves in September. This means that the British Museum cannot legally obtain either its eggs or even a specimen of the bird in breeding plumage, to replace those which were destroyed during the blitz. That applies to fairly common birds too, and only shows how utterly absurd the machinery of protection is and how greatly it needs complete overhaul.
I want to underline the excellent points made by the noble Lord about enforcing the law as it stands, unsatisfactory as it is. He said something about eagles and kites in particular, and about the danger—the very grave danger—of their extinction. The extent to which rare birds are being shot in this country is not fully realised. I would like to cite some reliable data to prove that point. In the last 18 months, two glossy ibises were destroyed, one in Anglesey and the other in Devon. A bittern was killed in Devon, an osprey in Sussex, a white-tailed eagle in Warwickshire, a rough—legged buzzard in Leicestershire, three long-eared owls and a marsh harrier in Lincolnshire, and a crested tit in the Spey Valley, which is the only spot in Great Britain where this delightful bird breeds.
Worse still, during 1946, within a radius of five miles in Hampshire, a nightjar, a buzzard and a merlin were all shot, in spite of the law. It is not unreasonable to suggest that the number of uncommon and rare birds which are shot each year in this country is in the region of 1,000, and is probably even higher. Perhaps five per cent. of those cases are actually known, but in very few can the necessary two witnesses be found to ensure a successful prosecution. I heard not long ago of the discovery of nine tawny owls found hanging on a keeper's gibbet in Yorkshire. A prosecution was instituted, as a result of the activities of the Wild Birds Protection Society. What happened? The offender got off with a caution. In all cases like this, nothing but a keener public feeling, which I hope this Debate will develop, more private effort, and more police action will bring about the enforcement of the law as it stands.
The noble Lord has, as I have already mentioned, quite rightly said a good deal about golden eagles and kites. As for the former, I read the other day that one was

seen hovering over Lake Ullswater, in my favourite Lake district. No doubt, it had been driven South from Scotland by the recent very severe weather. I hope that these eagles are going to increase, and in order to bring that about I suggest that co-operation between landowners and the wild-bird protection societies is the best means of achieving our objective. As for kites, I am not, I am afraid, very optimistic. Kites are garbage feeders, and this country is, I would suggest, almost too clean these days to serve as a place in which they can thrive They were, of course, once very familiar in the streets of London. That was before we had a London County Council, which secured that our highways and byways were well looked after.
The noble Lord will, I think, be glad to hear that buzzards are very much on the increase in both Somerset and Devon, particularly in the last few months. I am going to take this opportunity to enter a plea for that great friend of agriculture, the peewit, otherwise known as the lapwing, otherwise known as the green plover, and otherwise known as the peas-meet, a most unusual, but rather charming, name. I want to enter a plea for those birds, and also for the curlew. I could say quite a lot about most of them, and also about our friends the owls. It has been a sickening sight during this winter to visit various poulterers in London, and to find displayed for sale the dead bodies of these delightful birds the plovers and curlews. If I may, I will quote a letter from the "Manchester Guardian," with special reference to the illegal offering for sale of curlews. It runs as follows:
I was horrified to find on sale in Wolverhampton dressed curlews at 3s. each. The birds, I understand, are imported from Northern Ireland. Have we and the Irish now sunk so low that the slaughter of this lovely bird, and the consequent threat of its extinction, can go on unchallenged? In 1939, the then Archbishop of Canterbury. said, I sometimes think the cry of the curlew goes to my heart more than any other sound in creation,' and Earl Grey of Falloden, in his book ' The Charm of Birds,' wrote, ' To listen to curlews on a bright clear April day, with the fullness of spring still in anticipation, is one of the best experiences that a lover of birds can have. On a still day, one can almost feel the air vibrate with the blessed sound'.
I will not read the rest of the letter because, if I do, it will stand between me and other speakers, but it puts in a plea


for a much greater protection and preservation of curlews. The traffic in these lovely birds should definitely stop, and the law which prohibits their sale should be rigorously enforced.
I want to say how pleased I was last week to find that the Minister of Agriculture had issued an appeal to teachers and others entitled "On Behalf of the Birds." I hope its plea, "Please let them nest in peace," is one which will be widely noted and acted upon. For, undoubtedly, the recent severe weather has killed thousands of rare and common birds in this country. The cutting down of hedges in many places has lessened the opportunities for them to nest, and has, in addition, made the discovery of their nests easier. I also welcome the news that Heligoland is not to be blasted into the sea, for this island has, for centuries, been a halting place in the great migratory stream of birds from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean, North Africa, and back again. Its destruction would have dealt a shattering blow at an aspect of nature which is still, thank God, unaffected by the rivalries and disturbances among mere men.
I would very much like to have said something to back up what the noble Lord advanced on behalf of rare mammals and plants, and, in particular, to put in a good word for "Brock the Badger." Despite persecution, resulting mostly from ignorance, I believe that he is holding his own, and long may this be so, for the badger is one of our most interesting and intriguing wild animals. The wild life of our native land is a priceless heritage. It is a national asset bringing joy and peace to many thousands of our citizens, in both town and country. More than ever, I contend, in these days of stress and strain, do we need to capture that poise and that self-reliance which come from a contemplation and study of those aspects of nature on which we are touching in this Debate, and I sincerely hope and believe that none of us will look in vain to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary for sympathy and support in achieving our objective.

1.18 p.m.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore: I believe that we are all deeply indebted to my noble Friend the Member for Horsham (Earl Winterton) for bring-

ing up this subject for debate today. It is now just nine years since we discussed the question of the protection of wild birds in this House. Indeed, I was reminded, as I listened to my noble Friend and to the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Skeffington-Lodge) of those far-off days when we were still ignorant of the atomic bomb and unaware of the horrors of Belsen, Buchenwald and Dachau. It seems to me that, after two years of peace, it is time to pay attention to the welfare of things other than ourselves alone. It is not entirely, as the hon. Gentleman said, a question of our laws being deficient. Many of us recall that great bird-lover, John Buchan, the late Lord Tweedsmuir, who introduced in this House the Protection of Birds Bill, which subsequently became an Act, and which I myself had the happiness of facilitating.
Most of us must also recall that, just before the war, we had—barring present company—one of the most humane Home Secretaries that we have had in our time, the present Lord Templewood, who gave every assistance on behalf of the Government to any Measure designed to protect either birds or animals. The House may not know it, but just before the war, we succeeded in passing two Measures which I thought—as I was responsible for them in a small degree—of considerable importance. We got through an Act for the protection of geese and wild duck, and also one for the protection of quail. Quail were disappearing very fast in 1939, and, believe me, they are disappearing still faster today. Quail come up from North Africa in the warm season, and spread out into two sections. One section used to come here and the other went towards the Baltic States and Middle Germany. Owing to the shortage of food and the disturbed conditions in Europe in the past six or seven years, these birds have been shot out of hand, and unless something is done to give effect to the laws which have been passed, there will be no quail at all very soon.
The trouble is that these Acts of Parliament, owing to the outbreak of war, were never put into effective operation. It takes some time to get out the necessary instructions to local authorities and to make the country aware of its obligations and duties under these Acts. War broke out almost immediately, and nothing very much could be done for the time being. In pass-


ing, I would refer to the question raised by the hon. Member for Bedford and by my noble Friend in regard to the establishment of more national parks and sanctuaries. We know that there are places which are more or less reserved for bird sanctuaries, but they are not nearly sufficient, and there is not nearly enough protection. We know, of course, and view with pride, the work done by that great humanitarian, Axel Munthe, who devoted all the money he received from his books to the establishment of Capri as the biggest bird sanctuary. The name of Mussolini, which we often execrate, deserves one tribute in that he made Capri, by Italian decree, a permanent sanctuary for birds. I believe that we can go a long way in this matter by establishing more bird sancturies, which are very badly needed.
All of us who are interested in the welfare of birds, both rare and wild, want to establish one simple principle; it seems to be so simple as to be almost self-evident. We want all wild birds, their nests and eggs fully protected all the year round, unless, of course, there is some strong reason to the contrary. We should make it clear that we exclude game birds, because, in the present state of our food situation, I do not think it would be a proper plea to make. In the case of quasi-game birds, like duck and snipe, if these have to be shot—I am not denying that they may have to be shot in these days—let the shooting season be as restricted as possible, and let there be full protection during the close season. Let their eggs and 'nests be protected the whole year round. I am not entirely in agreement with the hon. Member for Bedford, in regard to affording full protection to certain birds which are harmful to farmers and others.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: I did not advocate full protection for birds which are harmful. Far from it. I suggested that all birds should be protected, but that there should be a black list specifying those which are harmful and which should be exempted.

Sir T. Moore: I am sorry it I misunderstood the hon. Member. There are certain birds detrimental to human interest—the rook and the jackdaw.

Earl Winterton: My hon. and gallant Friend has misunderstood our purpose. We are not dealing with common birds, but with rare birds, like kites and golden eagles.

Sir T. Moore: If my noble Friend was dealing with rare birds like the golden eagle, I was dealing with all wild birds. As the noble Lord expressed the view that this Debate should be as wide as possible, I think it is legitimate that we should not exclude birds we wish to protect. I ask the Home Secretary to accept that very reasonable, simple, generous view of bird protection. The Northern Ireland Act of 1931 is a very good guide in this matter. Lord Tweedsmuir's Act covered practically the entire ground, but it was not carried into effect. The local authorities need stronger orders and directives from the Home Secretary, and they should be of a very comprehensive character. The penalties for infringement should be made more severe in the courts. I know that the Home Secretary has this matter very much at heart, and I hope he will do all he can to bring about adequate protection for the wild birds of this country.

1.28 p.m.

Mr. Burden: I hope it will not be thought amiss that one who was born within the sound of Bow Bells should endeavour to make a small contribution to this most interesting Debate. I think I can say that some of my happiest days have been spent in the countryside. We all agree that the indirect influence of bird life upon affairs of mankind can hardly be over-emphasised. Agriculture depends upon the activities of birds to check the undue increase of insects harmful to the land and crops. I believe it is on record that St. Augustine once expressed doubts as to why flies were created, but I think Luther went a little further and said that they were created by the devil to prevent him—Luther—from writing good books. Whatever may be the truth or otherwise of this statement, we all agree that human life would be intolerable, without bird life to impose the necessary control over insects.
I was horrified the other day to read a description of the work done at a packing station, for dealing with curlew for the market. It was held as something of an achievement. Curlew and other birds were delivered to the packing station, rapidly plucked, wrapped in cellophane, and sent on to the wholesale market. Who is responsible for this? Is it the Minister of Food, or the Minister of Agriculture? There is a nicely adjusted balance in


Nature. Have the effects of the wholesale destruction of some of our most beautiful birds been carefully estimated?
I believe that there is a growing sense of the importance of protecting bird life. There are still ignorance, selfishness and—dare I say it?—a misguided profit motive, in some cases, to be overcome. But there is not only the utilitarian aspect of the problem to be considered. The conservation of bird life has its beauty and intrinsic interest for everyone with eyes to see, and with ears to listen to the birds and their music. During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries some of the most beautiful species of bird life have been destroyed, and some are, at the moment, on the verge of extermination. Emphasis has been laid on the question of the contribution that national parks can make towards conserving and developing our bird life. May I make a suggestion which, I think, might be helpful? We are developing great schemes of afforestation. There are already on record particulars of the study of bird life where a measure of afforestation has been attempted, such as in parts of Scotland. I suggest that there should be collaboration between different Ministries about the work of afforestation and the development of bird life. Further, would it not be possible for the many admirable bulletins which have been issued on bird life to be reviewed, brought up to date, and made, not so much bulletins for the experts, but bulletins in plain language, which ordinary men, women, and children could thoroughly understand? Finally, can anything be done to save the torture caused to our sea birds by oil fuel from ships? Anyone who has seen this sort of thing on the sea shore must have been angry and hurt at the waste of bird life. I am sure that what is being said today will be noted, not only in the Home Office, but in other quarters as well.

1.34 p.m.

Lord John Hope: I want to say how glad I am to be able to take part in a Debate in which hon. Members are pleading for the interests of one of the most attractive forms of leisure that I know. I would like the Home Secretary to answer two specific points. First, in connection With the preservation of small and rare birds, will he undertake to advise the Government to give all possible publicity

to the campaign to exterminate the grey squirrel? This is vital to the preservation of small bird life. A campaign was started some time ago, and did well for a time, but, psychologically, I think it would be a good time now for the Government to weigh in behind that campaign for all they are worth. The country must be sufficiently awakened to the dangers inherent in the continuance of this pest, otherwise there will be few small birds left very soon.
Secondly, what is the position of bird sanctuaries which are not embodied in any national parks proposal? I have been told that there is one in the Dyssini Valley, near Snowdonia, which is threatened by the War Office. I would like some more information about the status of such sanctuaries. Finally, since I come from its country, I would refer to the golden eagle, the possible extinction of which, in 30 years, was referred to by my right hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Earl Winterton). That is a sad and unthinkable prospect, and I join with confidence in the appeal to the Government for preservation of this symbol of freedom, even although we may not, perhaps, in more controversial moments, associate the Home Secretary's Party too closely with that priceless possession.

1.36 p.m.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Ede): I am sure that every Member of the House, whether present or not during this Debate, will feel that he owes a debt of gratitude to the noble Lord the Member for Horsham (Earl Winterton) for having initiated this Debate. The noble Lord, as those who have known him in this House for a considerable number of years fully realise, revealed that side of his nature which proves that even if he sometimes looks on the opposite side of the House with some slight disdain he does, nevertheless, conceal a very charitable heart towards his fellow men and to all God's creatures. Perhaps he may even include His Majesty's Government among God's creatures. Following the noble Lord's speech, we had a delightful series of speeches, which shows that there is a very live interest in the House on this subject. I was very glad to know that my hon. Friend the Member for Bedford (Mr. Skeffington-Lodge), in giving his list of the Orders which have been made under the Wild Birds Protection Act, said no


unkind word about the one Order which I was responsible for drafting—the Order for Surrey. My difficulty is that when an order is sent to me for confirmation I have certain limited duties in regard to it, and often it is better to sign an order which one regards as being not quite perfect rather than to send it back and have no order at all, or the continuation of an even worse order. The main powers of the Home Office and the Secretary of State for Scotland are gained from the Wild Birds Protection Act, 1880.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge: Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the members of the Wild Birds Advisory Committee, which is available to guide him in this matter, can be of particular importance in connection with the preparation of these orders?

Mr. Ede: I shall come to them later. They are not wild birds themselves. I know at least three of them personally, and I can only say that their interest in wild birds is stimulated by the fact that the wild bird must be of the opposite temperament to themselves. We have to carry out this law in the main by the police. I am perfectly willing to accept the suggestion that has been made by the noble Lord, that a circular should be sent to the chief constables of England and Wales, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland authorises me to say that he will do the same with regard to Scotland, drawing the attention of the police forces to the desirability of seeing that this law is enforced, so far as it possibly can be. We are exceedingly anxious to deal with the problem, mentioned by more than one hon. Member in this Debate, of the destruction of the curlew. Our difficulty is to find a person who actually commits the destruction of life. It is a matter on which we must rely, either on information supplied by good citizens, or on the activities of the police. I certainly hope that we may be able to deal with that matter. I will undertake that, as far as I can, the most active steps shall be taken to bring this scandal to an end.
The House may have noticed that the Secretary of State for Scotland and I recently took jointly as effective action as we could, to help to deal with the problem of the golden eagle by ensuring that there should be returned to Sutherlandshire a golden eagle which had been captured, brought to London, and presented to the

London Zoo. It is far better that the golden eagle should be in Sutherlandshire than in the London Zoo. The noble Lord quoted Mr. Leslie Brown, who wrote an article in one of the Aberdeenshire local newspapers with regard to the position of the golden eagle. He also wrote an article in "Country Life" of 25th October, 1946. I hope that the House will allow me to make one or two quotations from this article, because it illustrates the need for energetic care with regard to this particular bird, and I think that it is illustrative of the dangers in which some other birds stand. Mr. Brown writes:
In the Cairngorms there are now six active pairs of eagles and two doubtful pairs, while in Clova-Lochnagar the six pairs which I knew in the area in 1938 have now been reduced to two active and two doubtful pairs. In other words, over the two areas combined, about one-third of the total population of adult eagles has disappeared within the last 15 years. The decrease has been less sharp in the Cairngorms than in Clova-Lochnagar, where it amounts to about half the number of adult eagles present in 1938.
Mr. Brown attributes the decline in numbers to the three causes given by the noble Lord, and he says that when he was in Clova-Lochnagar—I hope that I am pronouncing that correctly—studying the eagle in 1938, that one gamekeeper seemed very disappointed when I said that I did not intend to 'lift the eggs'." Undoubtedly egg collectors are prepared to pay what seems to be most amazing prices for the egg of this particular bird, and it is quite certain that, unless effective steps are taken to stop these depredations, the probability is that this bird will be extinct in the British Isles within the next 30 years.
I can assure the House that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland intends to take all steps that are open to him in order to ensure that that disaster shall not take place. A question has also been raised by the noble Lord about certain other birds. I agree with what he said about the kite. The numbers of this bird, which is found only in Wales, have been at a very low ebb for many years and to preserve it from extinction the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds initiated a fund for its special protection. This fund provides watchers to safeguard the nests of these birds, and the Home Office has no knowledge of organised attacks upon the birds or their nests in recent years; but in spite of this the fate of the birds is very uncertain. It deserts


its eggs very easily, and when its numbers have fallen to a low level, its chances of survival are, in the ordinary course of nature, very doubtful. Whatever can be done to maintain the existence of this bird will be done, and I am asking the police in the areas where it lays its eggs to be particularly careful to see that everything that can be done shall be done to preserve it.
I think one ought to recognise that sometimes when we talk about the economy of nature it is not realised how, in a highly civilised country like this, much of what we admire is the result of the working of the skill of man with nature to produce the distribution of natural economy which we have managed to secure. It is interesting that in the New Forest, by breeding some Arab blood into the native ponies, they have produced some ponies who despise the rough feed that the original New Forest pony flourished on, with the result that some of the lawns there are becoming over grown with thorns, because the balance of an acquired economy has been disturbed by the interference of human beings in the matter. The Minister of Town and Country Planning, whose Parliamentary Secretary is with me today, desires me to assure the House that, in dealing with town and country planning, we shall have regard to the necessity of insuring that wild life shall be adequately and appropriately protected in national parks and elsewhere. I hope, also, that highway authorities will be as helpful as they can in seeing that some of the roadside wastes are so preserved that rare plants that can occasionally be found there shall not be destroyed by modern activities.

Earl Winterton: I do not ask for an answer now, but there is one point which I intended to make in my speech. It might well be considered in connection with the national parks, and in making these bird and animal sanctuaries, whether certain animals, once common to this country, could not be reintroduced from the Dominions, without damage in other respects. The beaver has been kept in conditions of some wildness without harm being done.

Mr. Ede: I am sure that the Minister of Town and Country Planning will hear of that suggestion and give it attention.

As far as I am concerned, I should like to see something on those lines done. One of the things that helps to destroy what I have called the "acquired economy" of nature are the depredations now being made on the plant life of the country. I was able to persuade this House, in spite of some opposition from Sir Herbert Williams and other similar people, to make it an offence to uproot trees planted by new by-pass roads. I have been responsible for the construction of the Dorking by-pass road, which is not too bad as by-pass roads go. One day the county engineer was there, and he saw a woman rooting up a rhododendron tree. He said to her, "Madam, do you not know that this is public property?" She turned to him and said, "What is your grouse, there is another one for you over there?" We have to get that kind of spirit out of our people.
I rejoice at the work now being done in the schools in bringing to the attention of the children, both urban and rural, the desirability of checking some of the depredations that have been made on bird life in this country. I would like to say too how much we are helped by some of the societies who give their time and attention to this matter. My hon. Friend the Member for Bedford (Mr. SkeffingtonLodge) alluded to the crested tit. I saw, in the "Field" of 26th October, 1946, a letter from the chairman of the Scottish National Parks Committee and the Scottish Wild Life Conservation Committee. They drew attention to this:
A note on the 'Colouration of the soft parts of the crested tit ' by P. A. Clancey in the July number of the magazine ' British Birds,' states that during the past three years the writer has had cause to prepare for research purposes, some dozens of specimens of Scottish and Central European crested tits. The Scottish Wild Life Conservation Committee, which is advising the Scottish National Parks Committee on the steps necessary for the preservation of wild life in Scotland, is deeply concerned at the illegal destruction of the Scottish crested tit, the eggs of which are protected by law and which itself may not be legally taken or killed at any time throughout the year. It is a rare bird, confined to a small area of the Scottish Highlands and it has already suffered much from collectors.
The Government desire to commend to the people of this country the efforts of these and similar voluntary societies, which are engaged not merely in preserving these bird and animal lives, but in educating public opinion to a realisation of the appropriate attitude to adopt in


these matters. I hope that the House will feel that the Government are fully in accord with the spirit which has been displayed on both sides of the House during the day.
I have been asked to have a look at the Wild Birds Advisory Committee. It was suggested that it should be confined to ornithologists. I think that that way disaster would lie. What we want to do is to associate, with the skilled and scientific ornithologists, people of good will who cannot claim to any great detailed knowledge of the scientific side of the subject, but are anxious to see that the natural life of the country shall be preserved. I cannot, as the hon. and gallant Member for Ayr Burghs (Sir T. Moore) asked me to do, issue directives. That I must leave to the great bird lover, Mussolini, whom he quoted with such approval. I cannot issue directives, but I hope that through the good offices of the noble Lord the Member for Horsham sufficient publicity will have been given to this subject today to arouse public opinion on the matter. I can promise that, in so far as I am able to issue advice and to encourage police authorities to take a more active interest in this matter than they have been able to do in recent years, I shall endeavour to see that the spirit of the House today is conveyed to all those who can help.

UNEMPLOYMENT (SOUTH CUMBERLAND)

1.57 p.m.

Mr. Frank Anderson: I represent a constituency with part of a national park in it, and I am sure that my constituents will read very carefully what has been said with regard to rare birds. I want now to come to the question of unemployment in my area of the Whitehaven Parliamentary Division, which is generally known as the South Cumberland area. It comprises a part of the development area, and it also comprises some beautiful lakes, beautiful countryside and also the sea. The reason why I am calling attention to this matter today is because of the fact that the number of unemployed, in my particular area, has appeared to remain static for some considerable time. We should not however forget that the figure of unemployed today is nothing to what it was prior to

the war. In some parts of my area we had 43 to 45 per cent. unemployed. Today the total is much below that figure, but the unemployed feel that they have not much to which to look forward, from their knowledge, as a present published, as to what the future has in store for them. If I take the unemployment figures, they may not seem to be a great number when compared with those of places like Liverpool and South Wales, but I venture to submit that the figures are, on a percentage basis, much higher than in some of those districts such as Liverpool and South Wales.
The latest figures which I have for 5th March, 1947, covering the three exchanges in my area, total about 1,600. Out of that number approximately 500 have been unemployed for six or more months. The unemployed in the area feel that whatever provisions might have been made they are not being made fast enough, or at least that those who have been unemployed for a considerable time have not been given a chance for employment which they ought to have had, and which they thought they would get as time went on. It is the view of the unemployed and of many others who are employed, that something more needs to be done. I propose to put a few questions to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade to obtain information. In the first place, it is not because suggestions of a practical character have not been made to various Government Departments.
The unemployed cannot understand why there has been no reply to many of the suggestions which they have put up. In the first place, as far back as September, 1946, I spent several hours at White-haven with the regional officer of the Ministry of Labour from Newcastle. I also spent several hours with the chairman of the Advisory Committee for Substandard Men, and, at these two conferences many proposals were made, but I regret to say that, up to the moment, we have not known any result from them. What were the proposals? We made the suggestion that something should he done to clear the slag banks. I know it has been announced, in answer to a Ouestion, that it is intended that this should be done, but in one area only, so far as I am aware, work has not started on slag bank clearance in the Cleator Moor district. If


it has, it must have been within the last 14 days.
Further, special proposals were made regarding the cultivation of the land. It was suggested that some of the slag banks and the areas around them could be usefully used for the production of food that would be suitable for use in our canning factories. There has been no reply to that suggestion. It was distinctly stated at that conference that the soil of West Cumberland was suitable for the growing of certain classes of foods which were suitable for handling by the canning factories in that area, and, prior to the war, some parts of that area were examined by well-known food producers from another country, and it was claimed that the land was most suitable for the production of food of this particular type. Nothing has been done in order to see how far this proposal might be put into operation. At the same conference, there were proposals put forward concerning the breaking down of munitions at ordnance factories at Bootle and Drigg. A strong plea was also made that, as there were a large number of men who went from Cleator Moor, Whitehaven and Millom to the ordnance factories at Bootle and Drigg, that breaking down should be stopped up for the absorption of the unemployed as a temporary expedient.
Another thing that causes consternation amongst the people in my area is the fact that it has been recently announced that the two ordnance factories, Bootle and Drigg, are to be handed over to the Board of Trade for the purpose of their use by private industries. In other words, it means that, sooner or later, these factories will be on the list for closing down. In addition to that, a proposal was made that a large number of acres of land at the Drigg ordnance factory should be cultivated. There is all that good land, which is producing nothing at all Why should it not be cultivated by some of the sub-standard men who are now signing on? This proposal has not been examined at all. It is a proposition for producing more food in that district.
I suggest that we are entitled to some reply indicating why the response to these proposals has not, at least, been communicated to me, since I acted as a member of a deputation to the Ministry of

Labour on 27th September last year. Other suggestions were also made at the same time. There are quite a number of buildings at these two ordnance factories and, particularly at Drigg, most are suitable for occupation by light industries. We made proposals that, instead of timber being wasted from ammunition boxes, the labour and material could be put to much better use. A suggestion was put forward to the Ministry of Supply but, so far, there has been no response. We have also suggested that it might be possible, by proper arrangements, for a large volume of printing for Government Departments and for local education authorities, to be done in these establishments, if the printing machines were made available for use. It would help to relieve some of the overcrowding which at present exists, and some of the difficulties which we experience today in not being able to secure pensions forms and other forms which are badly needed but are in short supply. In my view, the unemployed have made sensible and practicable suggestions, to which no reply at all has been made.
There is another matter which has been under consideration for a considerable time. I refer to a well-known iron ore mine in Cleator Moor area, which, for the last 12 months, proposals have been under consideration for development on the application of the local authority, as well as the firm which is operating the mine. Representations have been made both to the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Labour about the development of the mine, which involves the clearance of a large number of houses and business premises. This matter, I understand, is still under consideration, despite the fact that, nine or 10 months ago, the people in control of the mine stated that, unless something was done, they would have to close down, involving between 160 and 170 men in the loss of employment. We are still awaiting a definite decision with regard to that proposal and we feel that we are entitled to more consideration than we have received so far.
I know it is said that we are going to have Courtaulds coming into the area, but I was very much shocked to find, from a written reply which I received from the President of the Board of Trade, if my interpretation is correct, that the factory buildings cannot begin until the


year 1949 or 1950 to ultimately employ 1,500 men. We have been told, I think quite rightly, that if only these jobs could be got going, the whole of our unemployed would be absorbed. Quite a number of public-spirited people are beginning to doubt how far the unemployed will be catered for and absorbed in my area. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to deal specifically with this matter of Courtaulds because it is causing very serious concern to the people in the district.
Various proposals have been put up with respect to roads. Demands were made many months ago for the by-passing of certain districts. Not only are these places a danger to the public, but the whole question is one of very serious moment to the unemployed. If those bypass projects could only be brought into operation, they would absorb quite a number of the unemployed and give them useful work, temporarily at least. There is also the question of opencast mining. My information is that a proposal was put up in 1946 in connection with 273,000 tons of coal which it is stated can be got from three sites between Workington and Whitehaven. That would find employment for a large number of men, but so far, while I have had a most respectful letter from the Minister, the Minister of Fuel and Power tells us quite distinctly that other areas require preference and precedence over the areas I have suggested to him.
There is a heavy pocket of unemployment, in my view. The number is static. We feel that something should be done on a big scale to remedy that position. I have appealed to various Government Departments. Probably the Parliamentary Secretary will recollect that when the question of roads was raised at one interview he said, "That is for the Ministry of Transport." Another instance I went to the Minister of Supply and said, "What about bringing some other industries to these two factories at Drigg and Bootle?" He said, "We cannot do that. That has to be done by the Board of Trade." When we go to Government Departments, they say that the matter is responsibility of another Department.
The time has arrived when there should be some co-ordinating body between the different Government Departments, the local authorities, and other

bodies such as the Cumberland Development Council, in order to see how far the various projected schemes can be put into operation. I have a very strong complaint to make that we do not seem to get any co-operation from any of the Departments. They all refer the matter to another Department if it does not happen particularly to come within their sphere.
I will give one illustration of something which happened just by accident when I attended a Government Department many months ago with regard to a firm at Distington. A very useful slip was made quite accidentally. The matter raised concerned certain classes of work which were really required to be done. The Department's reply was: "What can you do about it?" I said, "What have you done about it?" They said, "All we possibly can." As a result of that slip today nearly 200 additional men are employed at that factory on the breaking down of engines for the recovery of certain classes of metals, etc. That has all been to the good of the area. Why should not that Department have had a co-ordinating body so that this could have been done without the help of individual companies or individual Members of Parliament? There is a real case to be made out for the co-ordination and co-operation of the various Departments.
My area has the biggest percentages in the development area of sub-standard men, and work is being provided for only 43 or 44 of these men in the near future. What will happen to the other men who are left? I have taken long enough. I could have said a great deal more but I recognise that we were late in starting. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to take into account these requests. Will he use his good offices to try to link up the various Government Departments so that they shall create a machine for the purpose of co-ordinating the work that requires to be done in the West Cumberland area? If that can be done, the projects that are waiting to be completed by local authorities, private enterprise and others will absorb a large part of the unemployed. I also hope that we shall be told something about the future prospects for my area. Will these men have to wait another two or three years before useful employment can be found for them, or is there likely to be useful employment for them in the immediate future?

2.19 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Mr. Belcher): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the brevity and clarity of his introduction to this Debate. I am also very grateful that he took the opportunity to point out that while there is a serious unemployment problem in West Cumberland, it is very much better than it was in the inter-war years. I would claim that in very large measure that is due to the activities of Government Departments, including my own, in providing work for those unfortunate men and women who, at the present moment are unemployed. He referred to the conversation he had with the regional controller of the Board of Trade and with a representative of the Minister of Labour—

Mr. F. Anderson: I am sorry, I should have said the Ministry of Labour, Newcastle.

Mr. Belcher: Well, he referred to the suggestion which he put forward at that conference and, in particular, to the suggested clearance of the slag banks with a view both to improving the countryside and giving employment to the men who would be employed on that work. He suggested that nothing had been done about this. If I may occupy the time of the House for a few moments, I will say what has been done and what is being done. At Workington there is a site of 14.3 acres at the old West Cumberland Iron Works which has been completely cleared for industrial development. An average of 12 men were employed on this clearance while the work lasted.

Mr. Anderson: That is not in my Division.

Mr. Belcher: I know, it is adjacent. One of the difficulties about this clearance work is that it does not afford the amount of employment which we would like to see afforded to the men in the area. Nevertheless, the employment of a dozen men is better than the employment of none at all. When we come to White-haven, on the Newhouses site, clearance has been applied for a 20,000 sq. foot factory for a firm which is to manufacture perambulators.

Mr. Anderson: That is not a slag bank.

Mr. Belcher: It is clearance of a derelict site, and to me it does not matter

whether it is a slag bank or any other kind of derelict site provided it can be made useful and give employment to men by its clearance.

Mr. Leslie: They are all eyesores anyway.

Mr. Belcher: Work is going on on an adjacent piece of land for a 10,000 feet extension of the factory, and there are 30 men employed on that work. Then there is the Brows site which is to be acquired as an open space. We are in touch with the Ministry of Health upon the question of the local authorities' powers, and as soon as we have completed our discussions with that Ministry we shall approach the Treasury for the appropriate grant.

Mr. Anderson: Is my hon. Friend aware that I was told those very discussions were going on in July, 1946, and will he explain why it is taking so long for accomplishment?

Mr. Belcher: The answer to the first part of the question is that I do not know whether or not my hon. Friend was told anything at all last July, but I am told that the discussions are going on. If there has been undue delay, I shall be glad to look into it and see that it is expedited. We are also having discussions with the Treasury with regard to a site at Cleator Moor.

Mr. Anderson: That is the one.

Mr. Belcher: I was talking about a site at Whitehaven; this is a different site and we are in touch with the Treasury about this. It is a site of 37 acres and we propose to clear 17 of them for industry. Two factories will be built there, one for a firm who are operating under difficulties in that district, and one for the Disabled Persons Corporation who will employ silicotics. We shall clear the area by direct labour and we hope to employ about 100 men on that job, as soon as we have the Treasury's permission to go ahead.

Mr. Anderson: May I interrupt again? I am sure my hon. Friend has not been properly briefed, and I asked him particularly to be specific as to when these things are to happen. May I tell him frankly that these matters have been going on now for nearly 12 months, and that at a special conference at White-haven of organised people in June or July last year, we were told that that


was being done? Surely it does not take nine or 12 months just to get the sanction for a site? This is what the men are complaining about.

Mr. Belcher: I am afraid my hon. Friend really does not understand the processes which have to be gone through, neither does he appreciate the shortage of the kind of skilled people who are necessary to survey these areas and to draw up plans for the work which has to be done. There have to be consultations with the local authorities, and there is the question of the acquisition of the site.

Mr. Anderson: Yes, we know all about that.

Mr. Belcher: And when that has been done, the machinery has to be acquired which is to be used after having secured Treasury sanction to spend the money. I can assure my hon. Friend that there is no deliberate delay in any of these matters. Delay there may be, but it is not deliberate. It is always my boast, when such things are brought to my notice, that I expedite them to the best of my ability, and I can assure him that if any complaint of delay is brought to my notice, I go into it immediately and do whatever I can to speed up the process of giving employment to the people in his constituency and in any other constituency where there is an unemployment problem.

Mr. Anderson: indicated assent.

Mr. Belcher: And there are many of them, some where the unemployment problem is much more serious than it is in the Whitehaven district.
My hon. Friend mentioned the question of agriculture. I am quite prepared to speak to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, and to urge upon him the possibility of agricultural developments in this area, although I do not think from my knowledge of it that there is a great likelihood of considerable development there. There has been, however, considerable progress towards the development of forest roads, about which I will give him some information, under the scheme for forest road construction, following further discussions with the Forestry Commission. I am sorry discussions have to be entered into, but there is no alternative. It is not possible for

one Government Department to go barging about on another Government Department's territory without first having talked to them, had their confidence, and drawn up an agreed scheme which will be economical and meet the needs. Advance notice was given on 19th March. The road engineer has already started with 100 men for Ennerdale, and arrangements have been made for a further 100 to start by the 10th April. A further 125 will be required by 1st June and these men will come from the Cleator Moor and Egremont offices. The first is in my hon. Friend's constituency, but the second is not.

Mr. Anderson: Would my hon. Friend say which forestry roads those are?

Mr. Belcher: If my hon. Friend would not keep interrupting me, he would learn that I am telling him precisely what he is asking. On 10th April there will be 50 men from Thornthwaite and a further 50 on 17th April. A further 250 will be required by 1st June. These men will he drawn from the Maryport, Workington and Cockermouth offices. Further vacancies have now been found for 20 men for Ennerdale Forest. The forestry roads are in connection with those forests, and the figures of men to be employed on forest work are apart from those who will be employed on the forest road work.

Mr. Randall: Will these be private roads or will they be available to the public?

Mr. Belcher: They are roads primarily intended to give access to woodlands in the forests, so far as I know, but this is not my Department. There is no intention, as far as I know, of making private roads and excluding the public from them, although I imagine they will not be capable of carrying large quantities of ordinary traffic. Also, I think there will be no likelihood of ordinary traffic wanting to use those roads which are for facilitating forestry development.
My hon. Friend then asked me some questions about the two Ministry of Supply Royal Ordnance factories at Drigg and Bootle. I well understand the desire of the people in this district to know precisely what will happen there. The first, the Royal Ordnance factory at Drigg, was built during the war for the making of explosives, and during the greater part of


the war it was used by Vickers Armstrong for the purpose of filling ammunition. They ran it as an agency factory—

Mr. Anderson: indicated dissent.

Mr. Belcher: I am sorry, but that happens to be the case. Whatever my hon. Friend may think, what I am telling him are the facts—I am sorry, I should have said the Bootle factory was run by Vickers Armstrong as an agency factory during the war for filling ammunition.

Mr. Anderson: indicated assent.

Mr. Belcher: Both of the factories are now being run under joint management from Drigg on the breaking down of ammunition. In Drigg, in addition, there are two sulphuric acid plants manufacturing sulphuric acid to the requirements of the Raw Material Department. Neither of these two factories is intended to be a permanent Royal Ordnance factory. They would have been declared surplus some time ago, but for the fact that the neighbouring Royal Ordnance factory at Sellafield had previously been declared surplus, and the Ministry of Supply accepted the obligation to keep a reasonable level of work at Drigg and Bootle, until such time as it seemed right to consider an alternative use. On 24th February this year, the Ministry of Supply declared both these factories surplus. The Ministry declared that to the Board of Trade, which has the task of disposing of the factories, and, in accordance with the customary procedure, the position was notified on 5th March to the trade union side of the Ministry of Supply joint industrial council.
There seems to have been some misunderstanding, in which, possibly, my hon. Friend shares, about the meaning of the notification. Both these factories have been used for explosives, which means that before they can be put to alternative use, they have to be decontaminated. I am informed that that process will take at least nine months. We were informed by the Ministry of Supply that the two factories would be made available for alternative use on a date nine months from the request by the Board of Trade that they should be made so available and 1st January, next year, was stated as the first possible date on which such clearance could be made. Unfortunately, it is too

late to achieve that date. In effect, therefore, the notice from the Board of Trade amounts to this, that nine months after we have requested the factories for alternative use, we can make them available.
In the meantime, the existing work at the two factories will be kept going at about its present level, and sulphuric acid manufacture can continue throughout the decontamination period. There are a total of 834 people employed, 455 at Drigg, and 379 at Bootle. I am sorry that it has not been possible to decide the future of these two factories at an earlier date, but all kinds of considerations have -entered into the problem. A variety of alternative uses has been under consideration by Government Departments, and it is only now that we have reached the stage I have outlined.
The hon. Member made reference to the iron ore mine, and to the delay by the Government Departments concerned in making up their minds as to what was to be the future of that mine. He himself said that the extension of the mine involves the movement of houses and business premises. Surely, he would not suggest, and no hon. Member would suggest, that the shifting of houses and business premises at the present time is lightly to be undertaken. It requires consideration, and, unless there is an urgent need for this raw material, which I imagine does not exist at the present time—

Mr. Anderson: Of course it does.

Mr. Belcher: I do not think it does, not of iron ore. I do not think that it would be right for the Ministry of Fuel and Power, or any other Ministry involved, lightly to demolish houses or business premises.
My hon. Friend asked some questions about road development, and the delay in commencing road schemes in the region. He knows that the Ministry of Labour have made repeated representations both to the Ministry of Transport and the road engineer on the necessity to expedite schemes in order to absorb temporarily unemployed labour. They have also been in touch with the county surveyor, and have advised him of the labour available. He is the Ministry of Labour's regional representative with whom my hon. Friend had conferences. He was also


told that preparatory work was being carried out for several road and clearance schemes. There are a number of difficulties. The Ministry of Transport have a very extensive scheme of road building all over the country and here, as in many other things, the difficulty is not so much the physical labour required to make the roads, as the technical staff without whose services it is impossible to contemplate schemes of this kind.
My hon. Friend referred to what is possibly the most important point in the whole of this discussion, and that is Courtauld's factory at Sellafield, and suggested there was an undue delay in getting on with the job. As long ago as last July, site clearance was started, and 35 per cent. of the site of 325 acres has been cleared. My hon. Friend will be as aware as I am that it has not been possible to do much site clearing during the major part of this year, as the weather has made it physically impossible, but the work will go on. A building licence has been applied for, and I am quite sure it will be received in good time for the building work to commence once the site has been cleared. I am as anxious as anyone to see the factory erected. It is to he occupied by a great firm which will give sure employment and produce the kind of goods our people need. My hon. Friend can rest assured that in the Board of Trade there is every desire to go ahead as rapidly as possible with this building scheme to afford employment, and to provide our people with the goods they require.
I wish to draw attention to what in fact has been a very considerable job of work which, in my opinion, has been very well done. Before the war, West Cumberland probably experienced more severe unemployment than any other area of the country over a long period. Between 1934 and 1938 there was an average unemployment figure of 33 per cent., and in 1935, out of the total insured population of 21,000, something like 12,000 were registered as unemployed, more than 50 per cent. Even in 1938, which over the whole country was a year of comparatively good trade, there was still 8,000 unemployed in that area. All the main industries were depressed, and all were men employing industries, coalmining, steel, iron ore. Out of the 12,000 unemployed in 1935, only 500 were women. As the hon. Mem-

ber knows, that is one of our present difficulties in dealing with the industrial rehabilitation of this area, that there has been in the past such a little demand for female labour, and that at present there is a much greater demand for female labour than we can probably satisfy.
Against those very depressing figures of the prewar years, in 1946 there were only 3,000 unemployed. That is high, very much higher than the national average—it is 8.5 per cent.—and far too high. The male unemployment has gone up from 1,500 in January, to 2,300 in August. In January, 1947, there were still 2,285 men and 700 women unemployed. An attempt was made to deal with this before the war began. The West Cumberland Industrial Company was set up, and, prior to the outbreak of war, they had built or converted II factories employing 750 people. By the end of 1942 there were 16 factories amounting to 400,000 square feet in production giving employment to 1,700, and providing a very useful measure of diversification of industry. The wartime building, of course, included the two Royal Ordnance factories in the hon. Member's employment exchange area.
We have been talking about the factory which has been allocated to Courtauld's. That factory may well eventually employ, when in full production, 1,500 men and 500 women, and must be regarded as the outstanding development of the lot. When we are talking about short-term projects, we must bear in mind that it would be fatal to plan the building of such a factory as this to employ 2,000 people, three-quarters of whom would be men, if we were at the present time to lose our heads and over-plan against the number of men and women who are likely to be available. I maintain that, although it is not very nice to have a pool of unemployed people at the present time, it would be very wrong to suck away those unemployed into smaller less valuable industries and to find, when we have built this great factory for Courtauld's, that we have not the labour in the district to put into the factory.
I would like to go on speaking much longer, and to give detailed figures about the developments that have taken place, but it would be wrong of me to do so. I think my hon. Friend knows that I am


as interested as he is in securing the development of industry in his area. I am as interested as he is in that, because I do not want human beings in the West Cumberland Development Area, in Whitehaven, or in any other Development Area, to have to face the kind of thing which existed between the two wars. It is the duty of the Government by all means in their power to expedite the clearance of sites, road development, the construction of buildings, and the provision of work in the shortest possible time. We are doing these things sometimes in the face of almost insuperable difficulties, and the difficulties have been added to during the last two or three months by the fuel crisis, by the weather, by the disruption of transport, and so on; but I assure the hon. Member and the House that we will do our utmost until we have broken the back of this dreadful unemployment problem. I am convinced that the measures we have been taking are the right measures and the only measures.

Mr. F. Anderson: Will my hon. Friend say something about the short-term projects? Am I to understand, from what he has said with regard to Courtauld's factory, that it is more or less a question of the sterilisation, or the freezing, of men in preparation for this factory coming into the district? Will he tell us what are the plans to cover the short-term position so that these men may be usefully employed in the meantime?

Mr. Belcher: It was out of deference to the House, and to hon. Members who wish to raise other matters on the Adjournment, that I did not give more details than I have done. I think that my hon. Friend knows what the short-term programme is.

Mr. Anderson: I do not.

Mr. Belcher: I will give details of the building programme in my hon. Friend's area. There is a factory at Hensingham engaged in the manufacture of toilet preparations which will employ 300 people. That factory is finished. The people are in it to some extent, but not the maximum number. There are, at the present time, 89 adults and 49 juveniles, but eventually there will be 300. That development is calculated to mop up some of the unemployment that exists at the present time.

There is a factory nearing completion at Hensingham for the production of artificial silk piece goods which will employ 150 people. There is a factory at White-haven for the manufacture of perambulators that will employ eventually 350 people, which is at the steelwork erection stage. There is a factory in Hensingham for the production of artificial silk goods which will employ 175 people, where foundation work is in progress. There is a factory to be erected at Whitehaven for the manufacture of ties, which will eventually employ 50 people. Approval has been given for this, but it has not yet been commenced.
There is an extension to a factory at Whitehaven for the production of vegetable oils and a range of assorted commodities which will eventually employ a further 300 people, and, again, it has been approved, but work on it has not yet started. We cannot start work on all these things at the same time. There is under consideration another factory at Whitehaven for the production of paper bags, which would employ 135 people. In addition, there are the road schemes which I have mentioned, and which will employ a considerable number of people, and the plans for the clearance of slag banks, and other unsightly things. With regard to my hon. Friend's question about whether we are freezing labour for Courtauld's factory, the answer is that we are not doing anything of the kind. I have given examples of the provision of work now, but I say again that it would he wrong to over-plan. It is as bad to over-plan as it is to under-plan. If we were to over-plan the industrial development of an area and to build factories for which there would be no labour when the factories had been completed, that would be the reverse of sound government, and we do not propose to do it.

POSTAL REFORM

2.47 p.m.

Mr. Cooper-Key: I feel fortunate in being able to raise today the matter of the postal services, which affect every man and woman in the country. I propose to show that there is room for improvement and reason for reform in these services, to outline some proposals for that reform, and to draw attention to the advantages of it. Before doing so, perhaps I might outline some of the back-ground of the postal services. Previous to


1840, and from the days of Charles I, postal rates were based on a complicated system of charges according to mileage, and collected on delivery. It was Rowland Hill, in 1840, who substituted for that system a uniform inland prepaid postage rate. From that day there has been no change in the nature of postal rates in this country, but there has been a change in the habits of the public.
In the first place, the development of telegrams and telephones has removed from the post a great deal of urgent matter, while the increased use of the mail for circulars, printed matter and advertising matter has increased the proportion of non-urgent matter until, today, it may he safely said that rather less than 50 per cent. of the total matter in the mails can be considered to be urgent letters. The habits and requirements of the people have effected the postal services further in two ways. People like to receive their mail in the morning before going to work, and business houses like to receive their mail at the commencement of the day's work; whilst no amount of exhortation by the authorities has prevented the public from posting more than half of a daily total of 15 million letters between the hours of 4–6 in the evening. The congestion at that time is concisely expressed by a writer in the 15th February issue of "The Post" the organ of the Union of Post Office Workers. He writes:
Go to any post office and read the counting meter on the stamping machine. For every 20,000 letters posted up to 5 p.m., there will be found 50,000 letters posted between 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. An office that finds a couple of Morris Minors sufficient for its day mail traffic will need twice as many heavy tonners for its night mails.
This is only half the story, because there is greater congestion in the early morning peak in order to get the mails on to the breakfast table. Transferred into the form of a graph, one finds two peaks in the activity of the Post Office, a peak at 6 o'clock in the morning going down to a prolonged mid-day dip or valley, and again up to a peak at 6 o'clock in the evening.
Translated into a record of industrial production, that graph would make a works manager's hair stand straight on end. Here is every sin: wastage of manpower, swollen overheads, obviously bad working conditions due to the congestion, and bottleneck in output. It would be unfair on my part to say that this trouble

has not been noticed or that efforts have not been made by the authorities to correct it.

Mr. Corlett: Would the hon. Gentleman explain what is meant by "wastage of manpower"?

Mr. Cooper-Key: If the hon. Member will wait, I shall come to that later on. I was saying that efforts have been made to correct that evil of the two-peak load. For example, in, the report of a subcommittee set up by the Post Office Department Whitley Council to consider the question of earlier posting before the last war, the following words occur:
We fully appreciate that the main object from the staff point of view of securing early posting is the amelioration of attendances and the reduction of the amount of night work; and we fully sympathise with this objection. We feel, therefore, that in formal representations to the public an appeal on the ground that a better distribution of work over the day would enable the Post Office to give better service may be more likely to secure attention than an appeal based on personal grounds.
The wording is somewhat odd, but among the signatures to that report was that of Mr. Charles Sanderson. We remember what happened after that—the exhortations of the Post Office to post during the luncheon hour or before midday. This had very little permanent effect. In fact, notices were put in the post offices at that time informing the public that the
vast concentration of business within four hours between 4 p.m. and 8 p.m. was expensive in material and staffing costs, and strains severely the resources of the Post Office.
These exhortations had very little permanent effect and the peak loads continued.
For a number of years successive appeals were made to the hon. Gentleman's predecessors to consider a plan put forward by the Postal Reform League. The founder of this League, Mr. Edwin Wells, was the writer of many articles and books on the subject and was the organising genius behind the League. In fact, I ought in future to refer to this plan as the Wells plan; it is well known to the hon. Gentleman and other Ministers as such. From time to time that plan received a good deal of support from industrial quarters, and also, over 55 Members of the present House, three of whom now sit on the Treasury bench, signified their approval of the scheme in 1945. In


spite of many approaches to the hon. Member's Department, there has been an appalling record of feeble, contradictory and prejudiced opposition from that quarter. Today, in view of the national emergency which is now overwhelming all other considerations, I appeal for consideration of this plan. I am fortified in this appeal by recollections that it took 20 years to get summer time adopted, yet today we wonder how we ever did without it. So my appeal today is not made without optimism or hope.
The suggestions I am going to make are in keeping with the Economic White Paper. They show the need for conserving manpower and for streamlining a service which, by any standards of today, must be regarded as, and can be proved to be, mid-Victorian. The plan is based on a Question I asked the hon. Gentleman 14 months ago, and I will repeat what my requests were then, and what I want now. I invite the Postmaster-General to institute penny postage on letters up to two ounces posted before one p.m. for second delivery next day, to be known as midday letters; the rates for ordinary letters posted at any time throughout the 24 hours to be 1½d. for two ounces and ½d. for each additional two ounces. Alternatively, if he cannot "go the whole hog," would he in recognition of the principle of midday letters institute 2d. postage for non-urgent letters posted before midday, leaving ordinary postage as at the present time, namely, 2½d.?
The objects of this reform are two: that postal rates should be based on two considerations, urgency and non-urgency; and the necessity for ironing out the two peaks of greatest activity and the midday valley of non-activity, with its consequent advantages. This plan is simple and, I suggest, sensible. Its advantages to the public are that they will receive a well-merited reduction in postal rates and, secondly, by discriminating between urgent and non-urgent mail, there will be a speeding-up in the delivery of urgent matter. I have just received, at 12.30, a very urgent letter which was posted yesterday at 2 p.m. and I think we might do better than that. The separation of urgent and non-urgent matter will again facilitate the establishment of further air mail services throughout these islands.

Mr. Corlett: Where did the letter the hon. Member referred to come from?

Mr. Cooper-Key: Hastings—I am sorry I did not make that clear; it was posted at 2 p.m. yesterday and arrived at 12.30 p.m. today. The advantages of levelling out the peaks will be a general increase of earlier post over wider areas and will mean later times of collection to catch the night mail.
Now for the effect upon the national finances. Any reduction of postal rates on the present system would be, according to recent pronouncements by the Chancellor, that he would have to make an increase of taxation in some other form, a principle I do not agree with but it is outside the scope of my case. Under the present suggestion an increase of volume of letters resulting from decrease of postage rates will result in increase of overheads as it would fall on the two peak periods. A reduction of postage rates would on, the present system, therefore, naturally increase the overheads of the two peak periods. This would increase the evil I am now striving to overcome. On the halfpenny reduction of mail on the present system, the reduction in the Post Office surplus will be £7,500,000, or thereabouts, plus increased overheads. Under the Wells plan, the figures show that on the twopenny midday scheme the reduction of the Post Office surplus would be £3,176,260. In other words, people who want to take advantage of the halfpenny reduction in rate would do so, and it would cost the Exchequer that lesser sum.
Flattening out those two peaks, a minimum of 10 per cent. reduction in overheads would be effected. There would be almost a complete abolition of overtime, savings in manpower, fuel and transport costs. I have figures and I can assure hon. Members that anybody looking at them will readily understand that the effect of these proposals would result in an annual saving of £2,750,000. There would also be an improvement in staff duties and in facilities made available immediately for the staff. The saving in this is estimated at £1 million. There would be an acceleration of mail, which is the formula used by the hon. Gentleman's Department, at an estimated saving of £500,000. These changes would therefore result in a profit of more than £1 million to the national economy as


well as a great release of manpower at this time of emergency. We must put together the loss of revenue and the increase of national income. When we put the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Postmaster-General together in relationship to this reform, we find on balance that there is an increase in the national wealth.
The effect upon the Post Office workers would be considerable. I hope there is no argument that they work in extremely bad conditions. Efforts to increase the standard of those conditions have been made but at considerable cost. At one time 2,000 half-time workers, doing a five hour day, were replaced by 3,500 full-time men on an eight-hour day, with a consequent total loss of manpower hours of nearly 5½ million per year. Under the formula which I have suggested there would be fewer early morning and evening attendances, and fewer all night duties. Midday duties would he multiplied and the covering period of the working day made shorter, while split and long-and-short duties would be practically eliminated.
The consequent increase of business resulting from the reduction of postage charges in these very restricted times would not absorb all the men freed by that levelling out during the day of those two peaks. I therefore propose that the postal workers who are made redundant by this scheme should be reabsorbed and permitted entry into other State activities now undermanned or they should be released for more productive duties. Every encouragement must be given A qualifying examination rather than a competitive one should be the idea for men made redundant to enter other services. Many older men would be discouraged by the ordeal of a competitive examination.
I hope that when the Minister comes to reply he will not turn down this scheme. The Post Office is very rich. On last year's figures, it made a profit of over £36 million, free of tax. I believe that if he studies the reform in consultation with his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he will find that many advantages could be obtained, not in the reduction of the Exchequer's revenue, but in the releasing of a tremendous amount of manpower and in the increase of national wealth that would accrue.
I hope that he will not refer to the slight drawback of the rural areas. That has not been overlooked. Under this particular scheme, I know that in certain rural areas there are only two collections —[An HON. MEMBER: "One."]—very well, one collection a day. Under this scheme, the Post Office will always have the ability to exclude the penny mail from the peak load of the early morning, and hold it over for delivery until 12 o'clock. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman thinks that there is a mote in my eye, but I would point out that there are a whole forest of them in the Post Office Printed Paper Regulations whereby, by putting on an extra halfpenny, the printed paper catches the evening mail in large towns but such a surcharge is unnecessary in small towns and rural areas. In my constituency, for instance, on a letter posted for night collection, I have to put 1½d., but if I go to Bexhill, about three miles away, I get that service for nothing. Therefore, I hope that nothing will be said about rural area troubles.
I hope that the Minister will accept the 2d. midday rate with the 2½d. rate, and that the public services can be greatly improved. Working conditions in the Post Office fall far below those in industry generally today, and certainly below those for which we in this House are striving. The present system is a burden on the national economy. Therefore, I would ask the Minister to end 20 years of procrastination. If he does not feel able to accept the recommendations of the Wells plan, I would suggest that he should set up a working party independent of his Department, similar to those which his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade sets up for other industries, in order that they can make recommendations and suggestions. I do not know what sort of dirge is humming in the heart of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but, as postal reform is hammering away at the door, I would like to say "Open the door, Wilfred, open the door," and, at last, let this reform in.

3.9 p.m.

The Assistant Postmaster-General (Mr. Burke): As the hon. Gentleman has taken up 25 minutes of the time allotted to this Debate, he can hardly expect me to deal with it at the same length. I know that it is a very complicated and difficult subject, and that it was hardly possible to


take up less time, but I cannot go into the details of it, and, indeed, I do not think that is really necessary.

Mr. Cooper Key: There is plenty of time.

Mr. Speaker: Half an hour was allowed for this Debate, and the hon. Gentleman's speech did take 25 minutes. It is really taking time from other people.

Mr. Burke: It is not necessary to go into details because they are not matters which can be debated across the Floor of the House. They are detailed matters which must be gone into by experts. The arrangements made for carrying the mail, which runs into millions of letters and packages a day from all parts of the country, is a very detailed matter, and the treatment of letters in remote villages has to have regard to transport and so on, and has to be considered in relation to letters moving north, cast, south and west.
The matter has been examined by the Post Office officials. I told the hon. Member for Hastings (Mr. Cooper-Key) last year, that in conjunction with the postal changes being then made, the Wells scheme was considered. Every time the question of improved postal services is brought up, the fundamentals of the Wells scheme come forward in the minds of those who are considering the matter. The principles of this scheme are so well known that they never really fall out of the minds of those people who are considering these matters. There are two objects in regard to the postal reforms; firstly, the reduction of rates and, secondly, the posting of a considerable amount of corespondence earlier in the day to relieve the pressure in the mornings and late evenings. The first essential of any proposed sheme is that it should not interfere with the necessary processes of collection, delivery and sorting of letters, and, secondly, it should be readily understood and accepted by the general public. Lastly, it must not involve any excessive charge or sacrifice of Revenue.
In order to qualify for the lower rate of postage under the scheme, letters must be posted within certain prescribed hours. The hon. and gallant Member suggests one o'clock. I do not know whether that is in the Wells scheme, but it was difficult to know which were the hon. and

gallant Gentleman's suggestions and which were part of the Wells scheme. The view is held that the public will post cheap letters in large numbers outside the prescribed hours. It is part of the scheme that if this is done, there will be a surcharge. That means there would have to be a collection by the Post Office of the surcharge on all letters posted outside the prescribed hours. That collection would have to be done, to a large extent, on the first delivery when the need for expedition is most obvious. The Post Office feel that this is a serious drawback to the scheme. It would cause a great deal of irritation to the public, who would vent their annoyance first on the poor postman, who would have the task of collecting the surcharge, and ultimately on the Postal Administration. There is another objection, in that letters prepaid at the cheaper rate would have to have separate treatment throughout transit. They would have to be dealt with separately in the sorting offices and at every stage. That means a duplication of fixtures in sorting offices, which is impossible at the present time because of difficulties in obtaining materials, and also because sorting offices, in far too many cases, are not large enough to provide space for these extra fixtures and fittings.
That is another very serious objection. From the point of view of impracticability with regard to the surcharge, and giving separate treatment, throughout transit, to large categories of correspondence, the Post Office have always found the scheme wanting. It is not attractive in many ways, although I am not surprised that 55 Members of this House have signed a Motion in favour of the scheme. It is attractive until the details are examined. The hon. Member asked me not to mention the difficulties of rural areas. Why not? In many rural areas, there is only one collection, and either all their letters would have to be accepted at the cheaper rate or they would be deprived of the advantages of the scheme. Many places now have only a midday collection on a Saturday. What will happen? Anybody who posts a letter after midday on a Saturday, at the higher rate, will score no advantage over letters posted at the cheap rate. There, again, is a practical difficulty in the plan. The Saturday midday collection was not so widespread when the plan was envisaged as it is now.
Then, the scheme must be understood and accepted by the public. I do not believe that, whatever the public are given by way of directions and advice, they will sort their letters out, and put them aside if they want them to go at a cheaper rate. For the last two years we have been trying to get people to put a 3d. stamp on the letters they send to the Continent. Only last week, in a letter to "The Times," a lady, writing from abroad, said how annoying it was to get letters from this country on which she had to pay a surcharge of about 15 centimes. Yet people, in their thousands still put only a 2½d. stamp on their letters every time they write to Switzerland or France. Even if the public understood the scheme they could hardly be expected to make it work. Consider the position of a man with a dozen letters, some of which he wants to go at the cheaper rate. Will he walk to the Post Office, and put one lot in and keep the others until next day? No, he will put the whole lot in together and they will all be surcharged—

Mr. Cooper-Key: No.

Mr. Burke: Yes they will, it they go in after the prescribed hour. That will lead to irritation. Therefore, from that point of view, the scheme is not practicable. The hon. Member spoke about cheap rates for printed papers and postcards. He suggested that the postcard which now goes for 2d. should go for 1½d. If the card was put in after the prescribed hour it would have to have a 2½d. stamp in order to get ordinary delivery—

Mr. Cooper-Key: But the person would get more immediate delivery.

Mr. Burke: But the card would not get there until next morning, which it does now, for 2d. It would not pay to have a 2½d. stamp scheme. Further, no scheme must involve an excessive sacrifice of revenue. It is exceedingly difficult to form an approximate estimate of the cost of this scheme. If the rates are to be 2½. ordinary and 2d. cheap rate we should lose a ½d. on all letters now posted before midday, and on those which are now posted after midday but which would be posted before midday under the new scheme. The proportion in which letters would be diverted from ordinary to cheap is purely conjectural, but it may be put at roughly 50 per cent. On that estimate, the sacrifice of revenue involved in the

introduction of a 2d. rate for midday letters would be upwards of £3½ million, taking midday as noon. If the cut-off time were altered to 1 o'clock, the cost would be greatly increased. This calculation refers to letters only as distinct from postcards and printed papers. If the rates on those two classes of correspondence were also increased and they were merged in the categories of ordinary anti cheap letters, additional revenue would be derived to set against the loss on the letters. On the other hand, assuming 1d. and 1½d. letters, and on the same assumption as before, the sacrifice of revenue on existing traffic would amount to some £20 million per annum. There would obviously be a fair amount of induced traffic due to the heavy fall in rates, yielding additional revenue of some £2¼ million. Against this must be set the additional cost of handling the induced traffic, roughly computed as £2 million. The two, therefore, roughly cancel each other out.
The scheme is very attractive. Any scheme which is painted in such a rosy light as that in which the hon. Gentleman has presented it sounds attractive, but instead of being a scheme for speeding the delivery of mail it degenerates into a scheme of delivering late, which is a cardinal sin in the eyes of all good Post Office people. While the scheme may sound attractive, in practice, when it has been fully examined, it is found that it is really an impracticable scheme.

Mr. Harry Wallace: rose—

Mr. Speaker: The Debate is running a little over time. It was due to end at 3 o'clock.

Mr. Wallace: I hoped that the Assistant Postmaster-General would say something about improving staff attendances, which was raised by the hon. Member for Hastings (Mr. Cooper-Key). I should have welcomed the opportunity of saying something about split attendances and the 48-hour net week.

GERMANY (EDUCATION ADVISER)

3.22 p.m.

Squadron-Leader Kinghorn: The subject which I wish to broach is the appointment of the education officer to the deputy military


governor to the British zone of Occupation in Germany. Some time ago an announcement of the appointment was made in this House, and it caused very little stir at the time, but for a comment by the hon. Member for Orpington (Sir W. Smithers) when he learned that the new education officer could not also carry on the job of head master of Charterhouse. I am not engaged in any personal attack upon this gentleman at all. He is a man of very great gifts, learning and educational experience, and of the highest integrity of character. Why I am interested is that I can claim, in a humble fashion, to have followed the events in Germany throughout the whole of my adult life.
I have studied their literature, educational system, politics and so on, and I hope that, from time to time, I may be able to say a word that may be useful to other hon. Members in this House. The other reason is that I believe that this Government in the last 18 months had been expected to tackle many of the great problems of the day in a different manner from the Governments which have preceded it. The education officer is a man of great integrity and educational achievement. He was educated at a famous public school—Rugby—and from there went as a Scholar to Balliol, Oxford, and became a prize man, and after his training he became assistant master at Eton. Until his appointment as educational adviser he was headmaster of another famous public school, Charter-house. With a training and experience in his profession of that kind, it seems to me that the highest pinnacles of achievement would be open to him and that he is the kind of man we might expect to see one day as headmaster of Eton or Harrow, and he would be a fitting choice for a distinction of that kind. His job in Germany is something quite different from that of the running and working of a public school in this country. For instance, he is to have full responsibility to advise the Deputy Military Governor on all aspects of educational life in Germany in all the-schools and universities, and in adult education. It is perfectly clear how important a job of that kind will be for the Germans and ourselves. He is, in other words, going to decide, for the rest of the lifetime to all of us here, whether our children are to face some recrudescence of Kaiserism

or Nazism, if that educational system in Germany is not run in a proper, democratic and progressive manner.
The educational system in Germany is largely that of day schools. There are the primary schools, and my information is that very few of those are boarding schools. I believe that in the interwar years experiments were made by people who wanted to introduce certain aspects of the boarding system, but by and large the primary, and, indeed, the secondary schools are mainly day schools, and very few pupils attending that kind of school are living under the conditions of the public school boarding school system of this country. The same applies to the technical schools and certainly to the universities, which are probably more numerous in Germany than in this country. Many of them are much older, and their whole foundation was that the students attending them went to day institutions and lived in lodgings or at home; they were not residential universities, in the main. The running of that side of the general educational system would seem to me to call for not quite the kind of experience that would be gained in experience of the public school residential system in this country.
If we turn to our own country, we find that the greater part of our educational system is rather in line with the traditional German system. There are day schools, where most of the children in the country go until they are 14 years of age, and from this week until they are 15, or to the secondary schools—the local grammar schools and county secondary schools. Those attending them go in the daytime and then go home, which is all very similar to the German system. If we continue a little further, in provincial towns there is the counterpart, in our modern universities, of the university system in Germany. Then there is the adult educational system which many of us know very well, whereby workers, in their spare time, attend week night evening classes in our large industrial districts, through the work of big organisations like the Workers' Educational Association. That is the kind of organisation which the Educational Adviser in the British zone of Germany will have to look after when he goes there. It is a similar system to the one in this country, but it is not the system in which the new


educational adviser has spent all his educational life, so far as I know.
I wish to turn to the field of choice which would have been open to anyone who wanted to appoint an educational adviser to the British zone. Based on the facts which I have given, we would find, for instance, quite a number of people in our country who have taken a German honours degree at a university and who have studied German affairs and German culture, who would be eminently suitable. There are others, no doubt, who are experienced over a wide field of our educational system, perhaps as teachers in primary schools and secondary schools, and who have also done work in adult education with the W.E.A., and have eventually landed in local education offices to become administrators. It is people of that kind who would be particularly suitable for this work in Germany. We know that there are quite a large number of people ranking as His Majesty's inspectors who are administrators of the first class and who know the whole educational system of this country, especially where it is similar to the German, and there is another large field there. Lastly, there are a great number of people in this country who have qualifications of that kind, and with experience of secondary schools or grammar schools, and possibly of adult educational work who possess just that experience similar to that which is needed in the men whom we send to Germany.
When I was in Germany last year as a member of the Parliamentary delegation, I had an opportunity to see some of the magnificent work being carried on there in the revival of the German educational system. I spoke to children in schools and youth clubs, and was most impressed by the work which is being done, not so much by the advisers at top level, but by the captains and majors who move about in the schools in Hanover and other places. A great deal of good work has been done there, and, if time permitted, I could say some nice things about these people to counter some of the criticisms which we have heard in this House. One does get the impression from the article in the Sunday newspaper the "Observer" that this job was given out on an old-school tie basis, rather than on the facts of experience and qualifications. Probably most of us have read that article, but

we have to remember that this is the most responsible job in Europe today. The educational system of Germany must be handled so as to provide that a Hitler or a Kaiser cannot rise again, and it may be that the lives of people in this country may come to depend on that. In view of those facts, it seemed to me that perhaps a little greater care might have been given to the task of choosing the occupant of this vitally important post.

3.33 p.m.

Mr. Corlett: Like the hon. Member who has just spoken, I am not concerned with particular individuals. Every educationist in this country is very well aware of the distinguished academic and teaching record of this particular gentleman and, what is more, of the very high esteem in which he is held as a man. I think that is possibly a more important qualification and I think that any Government that could secure the services of such a person is fortunate, but I think that, for this particular post, there are additional qualifications which are absolutely essential, and I am not quite certain that they are forthcoming.
I understand that the occupant of this post will be expected, in the words of the Minister, to inspire the German people to recast and remould their educational system on the lines of our own democratic State educational system. I should think that an absolutely necessary qualification for that work would be an intimate, day to day knowledge of our democratic, State educational system. In fact, I cannot see how anybody can expect to implant in such difficult soil as Germany our peculiarly democratic system unless he has complete knowledge of it. I was in Austria last year, and I made it my business to try to assess the value of our educational set-up there. I was completely satisfied that a very fine job of work was being done, and I said so to the Control Commission. I reported to the late Minister of Education to the same effect. I believe it was largely due to the fact that we had appointed there one of His Majesty's inspectors from our own Ministry of Education who was completely steeped in our democratic educational system as a teacher and administrator. He knew the snags and pitfalls. The success of his work was in the main due to the fact that he had that knowledge and experience.
Like the hon. and gallant Member for Great Yarmouth (Squadron-Leader Kinghorn), I am not at all certain if in this particular appointment this qualification is forthcoming. I only know that, like him, I read in the "Observer" that the particular gentleman whom he is going to advise has come from the same school. Whatever you or I may think of that, this will be cited as a classical instance of the power of the old-school tie on many platforms in this country. I would like to be assured on this particular point. The Ministry might say that although this gentleman has not this particular qualification, he has others which far outweigh the lack of it. I could quite accept that. In the case of one of our appointments under the Ministry of Education recently that has been proved, but I am not too sure that it can be true in the case of this appointment. If however the Minister tells me that all this gentleman's experience has been confined to public schools, I shall feel bound to doubt the wisdom of the appointment and for this reason.
Before the war a deputation, a physical training deputation, I think, went to Germany, and Hitler was asked if there was any part of our educational system which he admired. He said that only the public schools came near the Nazi ideal. He said that was because they were established as schools for leadership. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and not only did Hitler admire those schools but he set up a whole series of leadership schools in Germany culminating in three very large schools of 1,000 each in which were trained the future leaders of the Nazi system. I ask the Minister what the repercussions are likely to be on the incalculable German mind when the Germans realise that the appointment is from one of those particular schools that Hitler so much admired and not from one of the democratic schools which he did not admire? I do not know. The German youth with its mystic longing for leadership is difficult to understand. The German youth has been like that for 100 years, and the Nazis developed and encouraged this mystic longing for leadership.
I have been reading with very great interest a report on Germany by a delegation from the standing conference of

national voluntary youth organisations. They are competent to assess what is being taught in Germany. They say that the mass of the young people are neither despondent nor hopeless but are waiting. They are malleable material for another fuhrer who will capture their imagination and take the lead. That is a dangerous situation. I was in Klagenfurt last year and remember the incident which led to the dismissal of the headmaster and staff of a school because of the revival of the same spirit of a desire for leadership.
Will the Minister assure the House that he investigated the field mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth in which 5 million children are being educated? Did he try to secure the services of one of His Majesty's inspectors, one of the chief education officers or the head of one of our maintained grammar or modern schools? If he feels he must get someone from the public schools, which I doubt, he will find there are some most distinguished people who in addition to having public school experience have an intimate day to day working knowledge of what is going on in the democratic system. I would like the Minister to assure the House that he explored that field before making a selection from the very small undemocratic field which is concerned with such very few children.

3.39 p.m.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. John Hynd): May I say in passing that I am glad that my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Yarmouth (Squadron-Leader Kinghorn) has been able to get his Debate in at last because I know that he has on two occasions had to postpone it? It is worth while that the general question should be raised, if not precisely in the form in which it was wished. I agree entirely with the hon. and gallant Member for Great Yarmouth that German education—we visualise it in the Control Commission as the re-education of Germany—is an entirely different problem from the running of an English public school. We regard the re-education of Germany as something going far beyond even schools of any kind. It is a matter which involves practically every aspect of our administration with all the repercussions of our policy upon the German mind and the German life. Whatever may be the distinction as


between the task of re-education of Germany and the administration of a public school in this country, the question that is posed here is: Is the product of a public school suited for taking over the supervision of the task in Germany? The same question might have been addressed to me or whoever had been appointed.
The hon. Member for York (Mr. Corlett) asked whether I searched through the millions of products of elementary schools, the ranks of His Majesty's education inspectors, and so on, before I decided on this appointment. If I had appointed the product of an elementary school or a grammar school or some other type of parson, the same king of criticism could have been made, that this was not comparable with the task of the re-education of Germany. So I do not think that is quite valid. However, when it is suggested that this appointment has been made on an "old school tie" basis, as I thought the hon. and gallant Member for Yarmouth suggested, and charged me of all people with such a procedure, I must reject it at once. I assure the House that I take a personal responsibility for the appointment of Mr. Birley, and I selected him in the light of my conception of the work he had already done in the educational field, not only in the matter of public schools but on the results of certain researches that he had made into German education.

Squadron-Leader Kinghorn: We are very glad to hear that, because it will check any wrong sentiments that may have spread from the article "Profile" in the "Observer" last Sunday.

Mr. Hynd: I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that in this case, amongst others, I was entirely responsible for suggesting the person who was finally selected, and I did that on my own responsibility. I, above all people, am not one who is prejudiced by a public school training. My education was confined to seven years at an elementary school plus evening classes and copious reading. Therefore, I cannot be charged with "old school tie" sentiments. However, whatever may have been he restrictions on my educational opportunities, I do not for that reason despise those whose opportunities have offered them fuller education through college, public school or uni-

versity. Their path has no doubt been easier, but that is no reason, so far as I can see, for refusing to utilise their experience and training, not only in the educational field proper, but in life in general. It is true that there are products of public schools who do not redound greatly to the credit of the system, just as there are products of the elementary school who are not exactly an advertisement for unrestricted educational opportunities. It seems to me, however, that this argument is somewhat academic—the argument that all elementary school products are eminently suitable and qualified to organise and administer education, or that anyone who has had a public school training is ipso facto unfitted for any form of administration outside a public school. I do not think that is anything more than a caricature of a rather naive kind.

Mr. Corlett: That was not our argument at all.

Mr. Hynd: No, but the argument as I gathered it was that, because Mr. Birley's educational background was that of a public school, and because of the association of the public school system in my hon. Friend's mind with Nazi ideology, for example, he was therefore not the type of person who should be considered. I feel that is the wrong approach, that we should be not so much concerned with the background of a person as with his achievements, either in the educational field or in the field of general administration, and with other evidences of general administrative capacity. Those are the only criteria upon which I considered this particular appointment.
I do not want to examine the public school system, but I think it is relevant to make one or two references to it. What is the criticism of the public school? It is that it is too conventionally restricted to one class of people, the richest in the community, and develops, as my hon. Friend the Member for Yarmouth said, the old school tie mentality. These charges have, or had undoubtedly some basis of justification, Indeed, they are referred to in a number of paragraphs in the Fleming Report, which I should like to cite. One paragraph says in reference to public schools:
There were signs in the period before the last war that the public schools too readily imposed a conventional code on their


members, and this development and intensification of the house spirit undoubtedly played a part.
In a further paragraph the report says:
It must be agreed that if this training was valuable, to confine it to those from a limited social class meant that it was impossible for many boys who would have gained from receiving it, and further this restriction was to some degree positively harmful as it upset the balance of educational experience which should be found in all classes in a democratic community.
The interesting feature about these two paragraphs is that I understand they were written by Mr. Birley, who is the subject of this Debate, and sum up fairly well his understanding of the public school, and its relationship to our educational system. In regard to Mr. Birley's qualifications, I do not want to say more than I have said, except that he has an exceptionally good history of educational achievement. It has been suggested by my hon. Friends that, had he cared, he could probably have gone on to higher levels in that profession, and that is undoubtedly true. In fact it is an encouraging feature of this appointment that Mr. Birley had no hesitation, in view of his keen interest in Germany, and of his keen and wider interest in education and re-education in the much wider field than that of schools, since he could not be released from his present post, in giving up that post entirely. A comparatively young man, with such a career ahead of him, gave it up for the rather uncertain prospects of employment with the Control Commission, which I think is very much to his credit.
It should not be forgotten that he is not alone in our educational branch in Germany. We have in fact representatives of His Majesty's inspectorate on the staff. Reference has been made to the gentleman who is the immediate second to Mr. Birley, Mr. Riddy, who, until now, has been the head of our educational branch, and who has been responsible with his branch for some quite remarkable achievements in the reorganisation of German education. Mr. Riddy himself was one of His Majesty's inspectors of schools a post he held until seconded to the Control Commission as director of the education branch.
I will give some indication of what has been achieved. I have already made reference in the House to the difficult situation which we found in Germany at the

beginning of the occupation, with the intellectualisation of the Germans over a period of 15 years and the tremendous destruction of school buildings, houses and so on and with the prevalence of Nazi teachers who had a monopoly control over the schools, the complete absence of acceptable textbooks, which made education an almost impossible task from the beginning. Since that time, we have reached the stage when no less than 99 per cent. of the eligible children in the British zone are now at school. It is true that 42 per cent. of them only attend half time due entirely to the shortage of teachers, shortage of accommodation and other factors, but 99 per cent. are attending school in present conditions which I think is a very remarkable achievement.
We are still faced with the tremendous problem of accommodation. In an overcrowded zone, where repairs to buildings are extremely difficult and the erection of new buildings impossible at present, that is one of the biggest problems to overcome. There are also the problem of heating the schools in winter and the problem of teachers. Probably the biggest difficulty is the provision of paper for textbooks and general educational purposes. In spite of the terrific stringency in regard to paper pulp in the zone, we have already provided 9,000,000 textbooks, starting from scratch. That is no slight achievement. Already there are 14,000 youth groups operating in the zone. We have organised school broadcasting. We are providing free meals for 1,700,000 children attending schools, an entirely new arrangement in Germany. Six universities in the British zone are operating, with no fewer than 23,000 students, which is more than ever occupied these universities before. We have done all this with an education branch of 160 education branch officers.
We are now approaching a new stage. We are now handing over most of the day-to-day work of education administration of schools and so on, to the German Land governments, because having made provision for the government of the German Lander by German governments it is proper, I think, that we should hand over responsibility to them. There may be mistakes, and it may be a slow process. Handing over the responsibility to Germans has led to a certain amount of inefficiency, but they cannot learn to


administer unless they have the opportunity of doing so. Accordingly, we have reorganised our education branch, and are concentrating its endeavours on a much wider field. Some of the administration is centring on Berlin, but that does not mean that we are disposing of the whole of the zonal administration. Of the total headquarters staff of 34 officers, 16 will go to Berlin, and 18 will remain in the zone. They will have direct responsibility to the Regional Commissioners, who will have direct supervision over the activities of the Land governments.
That is the new trend in the British zone, and it is for the purpose of coordinating, not only the activities of the schools and supervising the activities of the German Governments and Ministers of Education, but also for bringing into the re-educational picture all the other factors in Germany, whether it be youth activities, youth organisations, adult education, or even the political aspects of our policy—bringing them within the field of re-education of Germany and acting as direct advisers to the Commander-in-Chief and the heads of every division in the Control Commission. It is necessary that we should have this co-ordination with a direct head who has had experience of, and has a strong interest in, these matters, which has certainly been shown by Mr. Birley. I believe that these developments, the achievements that have already been made by this small group of officers, are a tribute to their capacity—a tribute which I was glad to receive from the hon. and gallant Member for Yarmouth—and I feel, too, that the new developments and the re-adjustment of our establishment and methods will make a real contribution to planning German education and re-education in the widest sense.

COAL BOARD (PUBLIC RELATIONS)

3.54 p.m.

Mr. Baird: I want to raise the question of the public relations of the Coal Board. I do this not because I have any general criticism to make of the publicity of the Board, but because I want some information about plans for the future. Perhaps I might divide what I have to say into two parts. First, I should like to know what the Board are doing to acquaint the public, and especially the miners, with

the work of the Board; and secondly, and more important, I should like to know what machinery is being created to keep Parliament informed, and what opportunities are available for the House to discuss any directions of a general character which the Minister may give to the Coal Board.
I will deal first with the question of general publicity. Those of us who have any connection with the mining industry in our constituencies must realise that there is a new spirit abroad in the coalfields today. We know that the miners are taking a most intense interest in the workings of the Board, they want to know why this or that has been done or why this or that has not been done, and, therefore, it is essential for us to see that they are kept up to date with the day-to-day workings of the various Coal Board matters in their areas. Up to now the publicity of the Coal Board in my area at least has been bad. I will give three instances. At the time of the peak of the coal crisis some five or six weeks ago, the miners in the Cannock Chase area wanted to work on Sundays to help produce more coal. It may be that technically it was not a good plan to let them work on Sundays, but whether it was right or wrong, the way the West Regional Coal Board handled that request from the miners was tactically bad, and the publicity on putting the case over to the miners was deplorable.
There was another question about the West Midland region quite recently. When it came to appointing the various officials who were to organise the National Coal Board in the West regional area, one of those appointed was a retired local government officer with a pension of something between £600 and £800 a year. He was a man of well over 60, on retired pay, but he was appointed to a most responsible position in the West regional area. That man may have had certain abilities or qualifications which were necessary for the job, but there was a great outcry in the local Press and from the miners in the area. As far as I know no satisfactory reply was given by the Coal Board, to the natural worry of the miners of the area.
There is another point as an illustration of this lack of publicity. On 30th January I asked a Question in the House about the


employment by the National Coal Board in the Midland area of private firms to survey underground coal. The reason I asked the Question was that the miners in my area came to me and said a private firm was being employed to survey underground coal and was paying more wages than did the Coal Board. It was causing dissatisfaction. Further, and more important, the miners, who as I have already said have a new spirit, were very keen to see the Coal Board working efficiently, and they told me that this private firm, which employed about half a dozen or a dozen men, had one underground foreman, a non-producer, with another clerical assistant at the pithead supervising the work of the men underground. They only had six or eight men producing underground for two non-producers. The miners naturally felt that this was a wastage of labour and came to me and asked me about it. Being their Member of Parliament I thought the best thing I could do was to put down a Question to the Minister. I was rather surprised to get the answer that it was not a matter for the Minister but for the Coal Board.
Here again was another example of the need for information, though I agree that the Minister can perhaps not deal with questions in that way. The miners wanted this information to keep their spirits up, it was necessary for us to give it to them if we were to keep up that fine spirit in the coalfields, yet we could not get an answer. I, therefore, want to know, when questions such as this arise in the future; whether there is any machinery whereby the miners themselves can get the information they require? I believe there is such machinery, but I believe also that enough publicity has not been given to the fact that there is machinery. Therefore, if the machinery exists, will the Under-Secretary give it more publicity? Secondly, if it does not exist, will he try to create such machinery?
I want to raise a more important point, however, in regard to public relations, and to ask what control the Minister envisages this House having over the working of the National Coal Board in the future. I know that my right hon. Friend appreciates the need for Parliamentary control. The relationship between the Minister and the Board is defined rather loosely in the Act, which says:

The Minister may after consultation with the Board, give directions to the Board of a general character on matters appearing to affect the national interest.
An Amendment was proposed in the Committee that the Minister should give those directions only after consultation with the Board. I am glad the Minister accepted that Amendment. Does the Minister consider that the House should have control over those directions? The Minister said during the Committee stage in regard to the closing of pits that if one pit were closed he did not think that the Minister should interfere with the National Coal Board, but if the Coal Board decided to close a series of pits and there were serious social implications, the Minister would have a duty to interfere.
If that is so, then this House must have some control over that interference. The relationship as defined in the Act between the Minister and the Coal Board is a good one. I think we all agree upon that. Where the Minister interferes, or gives general directions to the Coal Board, on a matter appearing to affect the national interest, we all agree, I think, that there should be Parliamentary control over those general directions. How can we make that control effective? I believe that that problem will become more important as this Parliament develops. We have nationalised only a few industries up to now. I hope very sincerely that we shall nationalise many more of our basic industries in the near future. The first method which has been suggested for making that control effective and which I believe hon. Gentlemen opposite want, is that of Question and answer. That is the method which I used three months ago. Looking at it now I think it is completely ineffective. One cannot possibly be asking Questions in the House every day about the intimate working of the Board. One reason is that it would cause embarrassment to officials who are, I believe, doing a good job. We must give them their head and let them get on with that job.
The second method is by way of Debate upon the annual report of the Board. I believe that is also ineffective. We might have a two-day or even a three-day Debate upon that report but we could not possibly discuss all the points that hon. Members would wish to raise. Another method, and I am not convinced that it is not among the best, is that the general


directions which the Minister may wish to give to the Board should be subject to Parliamentary Debate. That was the method suggested by hon. Gentlemen opposite and something can be said for it, although there are difficulties about it. At the moment we have only got the Bank of England and coal nationalised, and soon transport will be nationalised, but, as time goes on, we are going to nationalise more of the basic industries. Therefore, the Parliamentary time available in which to discuss these matters will become more and more limited. That being so I am not sure that that method should be adopted.
Although I am asking for information and not giving it, I would throw out the suggestion that this House might think around this subject to see if we could not have either a Select Committee or subcommittees of a Select Committee for each of the nationalised industries. We must think about this serious problem and evolve some way of getting effective Parliamentary control over these general directives. I believe that the best method would be by setting up Select Committees of this House with proper power to inquire into the working of the Boards, who would report back to this House at suitable times.
I will finish by saying that I have raised this question today, not because I want to embarrass the Minister in any way, but because I believe that, as time goes on, the important effect of nationalisation—the increased efficiency of the industries—will become more and more apparent to the general public. But unless we have some machinery whereby we can get these results, benefits and great improvements over to the general mass of the public, they will not have the effect that they should. Therefore, in the very near future, we must create an arrangement whereby we can publicise the working of the Boards, and discuss the matter on the floor of this House, or by a system of Select Committees elected by this House.

4.7 p.m.

Mr. Ernest Davies: I think that the House should be grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Baird) for having raised this matter this afternoon. It is a matter of great principle, and one which cannot be effectively dealt with in the time at the disposal of the House on a day of Adjournment. Therefore, I suggest, that

the Under-Secretary should consult the Leader of the House on the question of the relationship between public corporations and Parliament with a view to having a full day's Debate on it, possibly on one of the days devoted to Supply.
I want to deal briefly with one or two points raised by my hon. Friend as matters of principle. I have heard Ministers in this House, when legislation has been before it, or in Standing Committees, say, time and time again, that they, are taking powers to control these public corporations which will govern the nationalised industries, that the House will have the opportunity of questioning the Minister as to how those corporations are operating, and that every opportunity will be given to debate the matter. When the legislation is going through Parliament the Ministers say one thing, but, once it becomes the law of the land, they are very much inclined to shirk their responsibilities, and to shelter behind the Boards which they themselves have appointed. Time and time again, Questions have been asked, as were instanced by my hon. Friend, about the B.B.C., the London Transport, the civil aviation Corporations, and so on. Time and time again Ministers have said that these are matters for the responsible Boards. Sometimes they depart from that formula, and say, "By the courtesy of the Board I have been informed that," and then we get a partial answer.
The same applies to the Bank of England. The very first Question put down to the Chancellor of the Exchequer regarding the Bank of England was refused an answer by him, and thereby created a precedent. By a coincidence, on the very same day a Question was put to the Prime Minister regarding controversial broadcasting. The right hon. Gentleman stated that the extent of controversial broadcasting was a matter for the B.B.C., and not for the House. I should have thought that the extent to which there should be controversial broadcasting was a matter with which this House was competent to deal, and one on which Members were entitled to receive information.
More recently, in the case of the London Passenger Transport Board, I put a Question concerning the employment of women conductors, and the dismissal of women conductors then taking place.


The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour said that that was the concern of the Board, and there was no reason why the Minister should interfere. At that time we were facing a manpower shortage in the country, and one would have thought it was a matter of national interest that women employed by one of the public corporations were being dismissed so that men could be employed. One would have thought that the House was competent to discuss that. Only yesterday, I put a Question to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation regarding members of the corporations who were employed in executive positions. I asked for the names of these gentlemen, and what they were receiving in remuneration in addition to what they were receiving from the boards. The Under-Secretary said that his noble Friend had no statutory right to obtain it from the public corporations. Here is a case of three corporations, subsidised by the State, where public credit is involved, and yet, in the case of the people who are appointed, the House is denied information on their remuneration. I quote these cases not for the purpose of obtaining any specific replies from the Under-Secretary who is to reply, but because they raise a matter of principle. In all these cases, the House has a right to receive information, but the Ministers refuse to impart it. It is important to realise that responsibility for asking these questions does not rest in the procedure of this House, but in the Ministers. The Clerks at the Table will accept Questions from Members to the extent to which Ministers deem themselves responsible to answer them. It is not the Table which decides whether the Questions will be accepted, but whether the Minister will answer them and take the responsibility. That has been established by a former Speaker in a Ruling given in this House.
I would ask that guidance is sought from the Cabinet so that there can be laid down a principle governing the responsibilities of Ministers, and Members can obtain information as to where responsibility rests and the extent to which they can put Questions and seek information. There is no doubt that Ministers have a responsibility for these boards, and that they should answer to Parliament for them. If they have that responsibility, then we

have a right to demand that they give the necessary answers.
I agree that nationalisation cannot succeed unless we keep the workers and the people of the country fully informed. It cannot succeed if Ministers, once they become responsible for a nationalised industry, come to this House with their lips sealed. It is not possible to know how these corporations are succeeding, except through the public relation officers and through Ministers. The nation is a shareholder in the public corporations. Public credit is involved. We believe that the country has as much right to information as the shareholders have in the case of private enterprise, and at the moment they are not getting that information.

4.15 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power (Mr. Gaitskell): I have only a few minutes in which to reply if I am to abide by the timetable which has been given to me. My hon. Friend the Member for East Wolver-hampton (Mr. Baird) said that he wished to raise two issues, the question of publicity by the National Coal Board and the wider issue of parliamentary control over the National Coal Board. As my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield (Mr. Ernest Davies) confined himself wholly to the second question, perhaps I might be permitted to deal with that first, as to some extent it also affects what one says on the former issue.
This matter of Parliamentary control over statutory bodies is one of vital principle, and, as my hon. Friends will appreciate, it goes far beyond the scope of my own Department. It is a matter which was raised during the passage of the Coal Industry Nationalisation Bill and other nationalisation measures. Frankly one is faced with three alternatives. You can have a system like that of the Post Office in which the Minister is the executive head of the organisation, in which case he must, I think, take full responsibility for everything that happens in the organisation; secondly, you can have a case like the London Passenger Transport Board where the Minister has no powers, not even the powers of appointment to the Board; or, thirdly you can have something between the two. Most of the nationalisation measures which have been or are going through Parliament during this period are based on the


third of those three possibilities; that is to say, the Minister has certain powers in relation to the nationalised undertakings, but these powers of the Minister are restricted. They are restricted in the case of the Coal Industry Nationalisation Act to certain specific spheres such as capital development, research, safety, health and welfare, and the issuing of general directions.
I think it is right that that should be so. I do not believe you can have a successful board of this kind, which is, when all is said and done, a very large commercial organisation, operating efficiently if anything it does is liable to be raised in Parliament at a moment's notice. I do not know whether my hon. Friends have had experience of the Civil Service. I yield to no one in my regard for the qualities of civil servants, but there can in my view be not the slightest doubt that such deficiencies in the way of initiative, imagination and speed as those from which they are often alleged to suffer largely derive from the fact that they are always operating with the possibility of a Parliamentary Question or a Member's letter before them.

Sir William Darling: So Is private enterprise.

Mr. Gaitskell: Not nearly to the same extent, because the Minister will not take responsibility in those cases, but he must take responsibility for everything that is, done within his own Department. Therefore, I am quite clear that it is right that the Minister's power should be restricted in this way and that he should not he continually interfering; but if his power is restricted he cannot be expected to take responsibility for everything that happens. Responsibility and power must go together, and that is the reason why this particular form of organisation seems to be the right one.
My hon. Friend the Member for East Wolverhampton made certain suggestions. He will not expect me to continent on the proposal that there should be a Select Committee, which is a very much wider issue. It is an interesting idea. I do not agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield when he speaks about Ministers sheltering behind boards. Why should the Minister and how can the Minister be expected to answer for things for which he is not responsible. But as regards general directions, there we are of

course in a different field. There the Minister is responsible, and I do not doubt that he would take that responsibility and answer for any general directions in the House. As regards publicity for those directions, hon. Members will probably be aware that there is provision in, I think, Section 54 of the Coal Act whereby the Annual Report of the Coal Board must include reference to any directions made by the Minister unless he specifically declares that it is contrary to the national interest to do so.
Obviously there would be an opportunity for raising these matters in a discussion on the National Coal Board's, annual report. I think one can also say that it is very unlikely that, if the Minister were to make a general direction which affected a very large number of people in this country, and was obviously a matter of first class public policy, it could he kept quiet. I am certain that someone would put down a Question. But I say that if the Minister has done something then clearly he is answerable for that.

Mr. Baird: The Minister is responsible for any direction given, but can the House suggest that the Minister should give directions?

Mr. Gaitskell: The House can suggest anything to the Minister and my personal opinion is that he would give reasons why he would or would not make a direction. But of course it must be a general direction. My hon. Friend spoke of the employment of surveyors and, while I am not prepared to go into the details of that individual case or of the other individual cases which he mentioned, I would be prepared to tell him why I do not think it would be right for the Minister to give a general direction to the Coal Board saying that they must always employ their own people and not employ outsiders. I have not the time to go into that, but if I had, I think that I could explain just why it would be undesirable to do so.
As to the consultative machinery to which my hon. Friend referred, that is a very important matter. The National Coal Board in association with the various organisations concerned has set up what I believe to be an excellent form of consultative machinery. At the top there is the National Consultative Council with very wide terms of reference. If I had time I could tell my hon. Friend what the terms are precisely. Underneath the


National Coal Consultative Council will be the divisional, area, and colliery consultative councils and one can say that virtually anything concerning the operating of an undertaking and the interests of those employed in it could be raised at the meetings of these councils. They are in the process of being set up now. I feel, and I think that both sides feel, that here they have something which may become a model for consultative machinery in this country. That is apart from the ordinary consultative machinery for dealing with wages and disputes of that kind. I am satisfied myself that so far as publicity goes, in the wide sense of the term, the National Coal Board are also making very good progress. I would refer, for example, to the new magazine they are producing which I think will be an excellent publication.
I would say in conclusion "Give the Coal Board a chance." We do not want to start digging up and looking at the roots of a tree which we have recently planted. It would not be good for the tree. They have a tremendous job before them and an enormous amount depends-upon them and we should leave them to get on with the job.

JUSTICES (POLITICAL AGENTS)

4.24 p.m.

Mr. Bowles: I had a Question down last Thursday to the Attorney-General concerning the disqualification of full-time political agents from being justices of the peace. The Attorney-General gave a reply which seemed to me to be unsatisfactory, because he suggested that they could not be impartial; and, therefore, I gave notice that I would try to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, today, to raise the matter. Since then I have found a certain number of facts, and I find this tendency on the part of the Lord Chancellor, which may be right or not, and that people with political convictions who hold high political offices, including Members of Parliament, are now being asked to resign their posts as justices of the peace. I would like, therefore, if I may, to widen the issue from full-time political agents.
The matter came to my notice from the fact that my agent was a justice of the peace for the County of Linlithgow. When he moved to Nuneaton, after he had lived there for 3½ years, he was

asked by the Lord Chancellor's Secretary to resign. I understand that every justice of the peace undertakes to resign in the event of his moving outside the county, and not being able to continue his duties. My agent did that. What was interesting was that at the end of one of the, letters the Lord Chancellor's secretary sent to me he said:
If Mr. Brown is a whole-time paid political agent his lordship is not prepared to entertain his appointment to the Commission of the Peace as it has long been the well-established practice of Lord Chancellors of every political party to decline to appoint such political agents to be Justices.
That was in reply to a suggestion by me that he might become a justice of the peace for the county of Warwick. It seems to me a very important matter. We are, in this country, trying to develop an adult political society, and believe that people should take more and more interest in political life and become more and more active. That a person who likes to give full-time service as an agent for any political party—this is not a party matter—should be disqualified seems to me completely outrageous.
I have had correspondence from various Members of Parliament since last Thursday, from which it would appear that the same practice obtains of asking Members of Parliament, while they are Members, to resign the Commission of the Peace. I have here a letter from the Lord Lieutenant of the County of London to an hon. Member in which he says:
You probably know that the Lord Chancellor, Lord Jowitt, while leaving the final decision in each case to the taste of the individual concerned, has expressed the view that it is undesirable for an M.P. to exercise judicial functions, even if he has time to do so, not only in his constituency but anywhere else within the area of the Commission of the Peace in which the constituency is included.
He suggests that every other Member of Parliament has resigned except one—presumably the hon. Gentleman who has handed me this letter—and says:
I believe this course will be generally welcomed by M.P.s concerned as it will formally relieve them, for the time being, of the obligation of attendance at Sessions, but before giving instructions for the omission of your name from the list for the Tower Division in the 1947 Year Book, I should be glad to know you do not in fact wish to undertake the judicial side of your magisterial duties while you remain a Member of Parliament for a London constituency.


I have suggested, in the case of my agent, that he might do the ordinary social administrative work, such as signing forms, applications for old age pensions, etc., being more accessible than anyone else to carry on that kind of work, without sitting on the bench. In reply to that, I received the following:
The Lord Chancellor only appoints to Commissions of the Peace candidates who are prepared to do their fair share of all magisterial duty, judicial as well as administrative.
However, when it comes to Members of Parliament, they are told, "If you do not undertake the judicial aspect of the work, it is all right." Yet a political agent is not allowed to do that. It is interesting—I am glad to see my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General here—to note that there are Members of Parliament who are paid to sit on the bench—Recorders. For example, the hon. and learned Member for Exeter (Mr. Maude) is Recorder of one big city. Recorders' courts are courts of appeal from courts of first instance, in which justices of the peace are predominant. It seems to me odd that because the hon. and learned Member for Exeter is in receipt of a salary it is presumed that he can be quite impartial, which I have no doubt he is, but that a person who is in receipt of nothing, and who is doing a job of work as a volunteer, cannot be impartial. It seems to me a most terrible thing to suggest.
I find that the general tenor of this correspondence is to suggest that this is an old practice. In fact, the Attorney-General says it has been going on for 50 years. I have taken the trouble to turn up the reports of the Labour Party annual conference, and I find that no fewer than 53 agents of Labour hon. Members are justices of the peace. It does seem to me that this matter is important. Why should any man, just because he is the agent of a Member of Parliament, be deprived of one of his political duties, while, at the same time, the Lord Chancellor takes the attitude that he does? The reply which has been given to me was that this matter was being submitted to a Royal Commission. I wonder if that is so. The fact is that the Lord Chancellor himself is initiating a new procedure on his own. Whether or not there are recommendations from the Royal Commission now in session,

the Lord Chancellor is, in fact, taking steps himself. I am sorry that I cannot just find the quotation I want, but I had it here among these bits of correspondence. I am sorry for that embarrassment, but the effect is that the Lord Chancellor himself is starting this new proceeding.
I come back to the general principle. I think a big political issue is involved here. A man who is engaged in political life, whether as a Member of Parliament, as a secretary or a part-time agent, or whatever it might be, should not be disqualified in a politically adult society from taking part in his normal natural rights. It seems to me incredible that there should be this disqualification:
The new practice inaugurated by the present Lord Chancellor was that hon. Members who had been elected to parliament were called upon to resign.
The Lord Chancellor is starting a new procedure, and I hope the Solicitor-General will not say that the Government can do nothing now because the practice has been extant for 50 years, and that it will go on until the recommendations of the Royal Commission are received. I hope the House of Commons will regard this matter as one of first-class importance.

4.34 p.m.

Mr. Sydney Silverman: I think this is a most important matter, and I would beg the Solicitor-General not to say either of two things. I hope he will not say that matters have proceeded in this way because previous Lord Chancellors have proceeded in this way. That is not why the people of this country elected a Labour Government with an overwhelming majority. I am not saying for a moment that because we have a new kind of Government we must therefore do everything in a totally different way from the way we did it before, but I do say that we ought to look at old-established practices, and if they are wrong practices, then we ought not to be afraid of stopping them merely because they are longstanding. The other thing I hope he will not say is, "Let everybody who is now a Member of Parliament or a political agent and who is sitting on the bench as a magistrate, resign, and then wait and see what the Royal Commission recommends." If he is going to wait for the Royal Commission to recommend and then consider those recommendations, he


ought to apply what he thinks is a good practice in the interim and not merely rely on some practices which have grown up.
What is the principle on which it is said that a Member of Parliament or a full-time political agent ought not to exercise judicial functions? My hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Bowles) said that the principle which is announced is that a man in that position cannot be judicial—

The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Soskice): indicated dissent.

Mr. Silverman: I know that the Solicitor-General dissented when my hon. Friend said so, and he dissents now. I therefore gather from him that he does not rely upon any such principle. I am relieved to know that. If he does not rely on such a principle, it becomes impossible to see what distinction is drawn in that correspondence between a magistrate's administrative functions and his judicial functions. If it is perfectly possible for a Member of Parliament to be judicial—and I gather that is conceded—what is the point of saying to him, "Do not exercise judicial functions at all, not merely in your own constituency but anywhere"? Why should he not? I could understand an argument, though I would not agree with it, that his strong and close local association and dependence upon the franchise of people living in the constituency might prevent him from being free as a man ought to be free in the exercise of judicial functions on the Bench. If that is not said, then the distinction drawn appears to have no meaning at all.
Why should it have any meaning? Why should there be any reason to think that a man associated closely with political matters should not be capable of exercising judicial functions? Where do we select our judges? The Attorney-General said in the House on 27th March, 1947:
I am informed by my noble Friend, the Lord Chancellor, that it has been the settled practice of successive Lord Chancellors of all political parties to refuse, knowingly at any rate, to appoint as justices, in the area of their activities, whole-time paid political agents, on the ground that in practice their appointment to the Bench was undesirable and might cause great embarrassment if they had to adjudicate in the case of either a prominent supporter or opponent, and that in accor-

dance with the same general principles a justice on being appointed a whole-time paid political agent should resign from the Commission."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th March, 1947; Vol. 435, C. 1388.]
That seems to be only a lengthier way of saying that he cannot be a judiciary. We will not argue about the words, but why should a political agent not be able to do justice on the bench when a case is put before him? If a judge can, if a Lord Chancellor can, if a recorder can, if a local city councillor can, if the mayor of the borough can, if the Lord Mayor can—why in the world should a political agent not to able to do so? And if you are really going round the world looking for people who will be able to sit on the bench in a completely judicial spirit, because they have no association with, or knowledge of political matters, then you will look a long way: In the end you would only be able to have stipendiary magistrates, and you would have to select those from those who, by their career, had displayed they had no public consciousness or public interests of any kind. Only in that way would you be able to have a bench which would not know anybody who came before it, and would not have had any previous association with them, or anything of that kind.
It seems to me that it is the most patent nonsense, and the most preposterous thing of all is to say that a man could retain his place on the bench and be a Member of the House of Commons provided he performed all the non-judiciary aspects of his office but none of the judiciary ones because, as the Solicitor-General says, he is perfectly capable of performing the judicial ones as well. I think this matter ought to be looked at. In practice, of course, it is not true. In practice, as I think my hon. and learned Friend knows, it has never been true that hon. Members of this House appointed to the bench have ceased to perform judicial functions on the bench in their own constituencies? It is a very long-standing tradition that a Member of Parliament goes on doing so, and has always done so during many years, in spite of the statements made to the contrary.
It has also been the rule, at any rate in the county districts and in the rural districts, that the local Member has almost invariably been a member of the local bench and has continued lo practise. Indeed, one of the greatest complaints about the appointment of magistrates—I


will not say more about it because I know the Royal Commission is inquiring into that—is the failure of those responsible for appointing magistrates to make the composition of the bench correspond to the prevailing modes of thought and development in the community as a whole. I hope the Solicitor-General will be able to say that, since they recognise that people who are associated with politics may be, and frequently are, more judicial than anyone else, he will not interfere with their functions unless and until some Commission accepted by this House recommends to the contrary.

4.43 p.m.

Mr. Paget: I feel a certain amount of sympathy with the principle of separating the political and the judicial functions, but I agree entirely that it would be a completely new practice, that the practice for many hundreds of years has been for hon. Members of this House to sit on the bench in their constituencies. I do not think it is a good practice. However, there is another case for which I can see no kind of justification whatever, and that is a tradition which debars a man from sitting on the bench because he happens to hold a licence, particularly when the holding of that licence is conditional upon his being a man of exceptional character. In Northampton we elected a mayor to be our chief magistrate. That mayor was a member of the Conservative Party. We elected him because we deemed him a fit and proper person to be our first citizen, upon which the Lord Chancellor demanded from him an undertaking not merely that he would not sit on the licensing session—that one could well understand—that he would exercise judicial functions but, expressly, that he would not so much as sign a vaccination certificate in his mayor's parlour. Really I submit that sort of thing is quite outrageous and is a great insult to a trade which has done more to stop the evils of intoxication in this country than any other—the good conduct of public houses and public buildings. You have here a system in which a man may hold the King's commission and be the King's servant, and yet may not sit and judge between the King and the servant. We have a situation in which a man may hold a dog licence, and still sit on the bench, or hold a tobacco licence, and still sit on the bench, but, because he holds the one licence, a condition of which is

exceptionally good behaviour, he is forbidden to exercise those functions for which a town has elected him when they made him mayor.

4.45 p.m.

The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Soskice): This Debate started from the question of the appointment of whole-time political agents as justices of the peace, and went on to the question of appointment of Members of Parliament, and then publicans as justices. I want to bring the Debate back on the focal point on which it began. Before I do so, however, I would like to correct some misapprehensions, because, after all, it is important to be accurate. The letter from which my hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Bowles) quoted in support of his assertion that the Lord Chancellor was introducing a new precedent, did not relate to Members of Parliament as justices of the peace, but to advisory committees, which is an entirely different thing, and appears clearly from the terms of the law. In regard to the question of Members of Parliament, the position was made perfectly plain in an answer I gave which I will quote:
My noble Friend leaves it to individual discretion to decide whether a Member of Parliament should exercise judicial functions during the period of his Parliamentary representation. At the same time the Lord Chancellor is disposed to think that a Member of Parliament who devotes himself to serving his constituents in Parliament may feel that this cannot be well combined with the exercise of judicial functions by him in his constituency, and he would not regard a Member as neglecting his magisterial duties if he felt that it was, on the whole, better for him, while he is a Member, not to sit on the Bench."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th November, 1945; Vol. 415, C. 2089.]
It is left, therefore, entirely in his own discretion.
In regard to publicans, I cannot deal with that matter in the short time I have at my disposal. But, in their case, it is thought that because of their relations with persons who resort to their premises in respect of which they hold licences, difficulty might arise if they were justices of the peace.

Mr. Bowles: I think my hon. and learned Friend ought to explain that Lord Willingdon, the Lord Lieutenant of the County of London, said that this referred to the Lord Chancellor's wishes and his view was that it should be left to the taste of the individual concerned.

The Solicitor-General: I am sorry. I gave an answer to this House with the approval and authority of my noble Friend and I ask the House, however that might be interpreted by the Lord Lieutenant, or anybody else, to accept that as the view of my noble Friend.

Mr. Bing: rose—

The Solicitor-General: I am sorry I cannot give way. I wish to say that the fact that a particular person is regarded as disqualified does not in the least imply any reflection on him whatever. It is important that that should be remembered. In the interests of accuracy, I wish to say that neither I nor the Attorney-General, have ever said that the persons to whom the disqualification applies could not be impartial. I say quite emphatically that I have not the slightest doubt that political agents—

Mr. S. Silverman: rose—

The Solicitor-General: I am sorry, I cannot give way. I have very little time.

Mr. Silverman: The hon. and learned Member has 10 minutes.

The Solicitor-General: The objection to the employment of political agents is not that they would not be impartial, but that the public might be disquieted because it might seem to them that there was possibility of bias. I am not committing my noble Friend to the view that that is a sufficient reason necessarily for disqualification, but I would say that there is a strong case for that view. Let hon. Members imagine the position of a full-time political agent who is called upon to adjudicate in the case of a political opponent, whom he may have spent weeks in denouncing, with whose policy he may acutely disagree, whom he may cordially dislike, and with whom he may be in intimate personal contact in various relationships every day.

Mr. S. Silverman: What about the Lord Chancellor himself?

The Solicitor-General: In such a case, if he were called upon to adjudicate on a person of that sort, the public, who place trust in the impartial administration of justice, might feel disquiet. They might wonder whether such a person could be expected to be entirely impartial and judicial in a case of that sort. Let us take

the converse case, where he is called upon to adjudicate in regard to a strong supporter of his own party. The public might think that there was a strong temptation for him not to be completely judicial. I do not suggest for a moment that he would not be, but the whole principle is based on this, which is very fundamental, that justice should not only be done, but should be patently seen to be done, and everybody who sees it administered should feel confident that it has been done. That is the case for the disqualification with regard to political agents. May I also remind the House that the disqualification is only said to exist in the case of fulltime paid political agents. My hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton said that he thought 53 agents had been so appointed. If he will look into their cases, he will find that they were not fulltime political agents, but were secretaries—

Mr. Bowles: I said secretaries.

The Solicitor-General: No disqualification has been held to exist in their case, although the principle might be said equally to exist perhaps in quite the same degree in their case. My hon. Friends quoted the case of recorders and the Lord Chancellor himself. There is a distinction, although my hon. Friends may not accept it. After all, the persons to whom they refer, recorders and the Lord Chancellor, are persons of high judicial training. Their past experience and the work which they have been called upon to undertake at the Bar has been such as to make apparent to them the urgent necessity of distinguishing a judicial function from the function of an advocate. Therefore, they have certain qualifications in that regard which a person who has not that legal training may not be thought to have. I emphasise "thought to have." I should have thought that if one was asking whether the public would be more satisfied with the determination of a person who was legally trained, although he had political associations, and the determination of a person who had political associations and was not legally trained, they would be disposed to have far more confidence in the case of a person who was legally trained.
It may be said that the disqualification should apply to everybody who has any sort of political association. One has to draw the line somewhere, however, and the line has been drawn for some years past, not by the present Lord Chancellor,


but by many of his predecessors consistently, at the stage where one gets from the local unpaid organiser to the paid organiser who is paid to give his full time towards this particular work. That is where the line is drawn. When my noble Friend took office in August, 1945, he found himself confronted with this position, that this extremely difficult and delicate question of such utter and vital importance had not been considered by any Royal Commission since 1911. Life has changed since then; times have marched on. He thought, and I ask the House to say that he was justified in thinking, that that was particularly the sort of problem which should be investigated by a Royal Commission after the expiry of some 36 years. For those reasons, the Government thought it right to advise His Majesty to appoint a Royal Commission. The more difficult these problems are, as instanced by my hon. Friends, and the more apparent contradictions and discrepancies there are with regard to the policy of Parliament, the more important and the more right, in my submission, was the judgment of my noble Friend in thinking that it was high time the whole matter was submitted to an impartial body which could take evidence on the matter and which would have expert knowledge of it.
I am told that the Royal Commission is still taking evidence, and I apprehend that it may go on taking it for some months, but in due course their recommendations will be forthcoming. It may well be that their recommendations will be of sufficient importance for this House to discuss them. I would ask the House to say that it would be undesirable in those circumstances for my noble Friend to change the practice until these recommendations are to hand. As I have pointed out, it is not as if the disqualification existed only in the case of full-time paid political agents. If he changes the practice in that connection, is he also to change the practice in the case of publicans, beneficed clergymen, solicitors, police officers and so on? Disqualifications for various reasons are said to exist in other cases. Is he to reverse the whole practice and introduce innovations of his own which are contrary to and fundamentally different from the practice laid down and followed year after year by his predecessors? The view my noble Friend takes is that it is

undesirable to do that. If he changes the practice, what is to happen supposing the recommendations of the Royal Commission are that the practice should continue to be followed? If he changed the practice now it would mean that he would be a priori expressing disagreement with those recommendations. It is far better, for the time being until those recommendations are to hand, to continue the existing practice, and that is what he is doing.

Mr. Bowles: Then from now on he will tell every full-time political agent to resign tomorrow? What about the Attorney-General's agent?

The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General's agent is not a full-time political agent.

Mr. Bowles: Is he paid?

The Solicitor-General: I am told not, but whether he is or not I can say that my noble Friend, if a case of a fully paid political agent exercising judicial functions as a justice of the peace were brought to his notice, would ask him to resign or suggest that he ought to resign. That is what he would do, and that is the consistent practice he thinks it right to follow.
I ask the House to say that here is a position in which there has been an established practice; it is an elaborate code, you cannot tinker with part of it without, logically, dealing with the whole of it. It is now under investigation by the Royal Commission, whose terms of reference specifically cover the question of the appointment, qualifications and disqualifications of justices. They will in the course of a few months make recommendations, which no doubt will be of the highest importance from the national point of view. They will require careful consideration. During that period my noble Friend has every intention of continuing the practice which he has inherited from his predecessors until those recommendations are to hand and have been fully considered. He will then consider whether any change in the established practice should be introduced. Until then it is his intention to follow the established practice.

Mr. Driberg: Can my hon. and learned Friend say whether Members of another place are similarly disqualified?

The Solicitor-General: So far as I know, no.

Mr. Driberg: Why not? Are they nonpolitical?

The Solicitor-General: This is an established practice which is being continued for the time being. Why should they be disqualified? I would ask my hon. Friend to say if he thinks they ought to be.

Mr. Driberg: No, I do not.

The Solicitor-General: The same kind of disqualifications in their case have not been thought to exist. The disqualifications have been clearly worked out in practice in the particular categories I have instanced.

Mr. Driberg: What is the difference between the House of Lords and the House of Commons?

The Solicitor-General: I have explained that a Member of Parliament is left to

his own discretion in deciding whether he will continue to exercise judicial functions. There is an obvious distinction, in point of fact, that a Member of Parliament is in close touch with the personalities in his division. He knows intimately every-body who is there, particularly the prominent personalities, and that is not the case with members of another place.

Mr. Driberg: But they live somewhere.

The Solicitor-General: Yes, they live somewhere, but they are not in intimate contact or closely associated with a particular place, that is the difference between the two.

It being five o'Clock, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House without Queston put, pursuant to the Order of the House yesterday, till Tuesday, 15th April, pursuant to the Resolution of the House yesterday.